-
Revolt in ULFA ranks over peace talks
Published: May 9, 2008 at 11:36 AM
NEW DELHI, May 9 (UPI) -- Indian intelligence agencies said a revolt is brewing in the insurgent United Liberation Front of Assam with a faction calling for talks with the government. -
India protests heavy firing from Pakistan
Published: May 9, 2008 at 11:29 AM
NEW DELHI, May 9 (UPI) -- India Friday lodged a strong protest with Pakistan Rangers following heavy firing from across the border that India says was used to send in militants. -
Turkey and Iraq hold bilateral talks
Published: May 9, 2008 at 11:24 AM
BAGHDAD, May 9 (UPI) -- Iraqi President Jalal Talabani welcomed a high-level delegation of Kurdish lawmakers from the Turkish Parliament Thursday in Iraqi Kurdistan.
-
Dogs of War: Inherently governmental?
Published: May 9, 2008 at 12:03 PM
By DAVID ISENBERG
WASHINGTON, May 9 (UPI) -- Amid all the polemics over the use of private military and security contractors by the U.S. government there are two words one rarely sees, but they lie at the very heart of the debate: "inherently governmental." -
Iraq Press Roundup
Published: May 9, 2008 at 11:28 AM
By HIBA DAWOOD
UPI Correspondent
The Sunni Al Mashriq newspaper said Thursday in an editorial titled "The killing of 15 women" that the problem any militia in the world faces is that no matter how politically professional, organized and ideologically mature they are, they still might be accepted by one country and rejected by another. -
Analysis: Border force seeks recognition
Published: May 9, 2008 at 11:21 AM
By KUSHAL JEENA
UPI Correspondent
NEW DELHI, May 9 (UPI) -- An Indian police force that guards the Indo-Tibetan border wants the federal Interior Ministry to give it the same status as other paramilitary security forces. -
Atlantic Eye: Hardly a done deal
Published: May 8, 2008 at 2:08 PM
By MARC S. ELLENBOGEN
UPI International Columnist
PRAGUE, Czech Republic, May 8 (UPI) -- Most Europeans see the U.S. presidential election as a done deal. They are quite surprised. They were convinced that Sen. Hillary Clinton was the sure thing. Now, and they are confused, they are expecting the inevitable: Sen. John McCain as president. -
Iraq Press Roundup
Published: May 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM
By HIBA DAWOOD
UPI Correspondent
Shebab Al Iraq newspaper Wednesday carried an editorial with the headline "Who is responsible for the atrocities in Sadr City?" -
U.S. looking into Iraq reconstruction contract requiring Iranian parts
Published: May 7, 2008 at 3:23 PM
By BEN LANDO
UPI Editor
WASHINGTON, May 7 (UPI) -- U.S. forces are investigating two contracts to build schools in northern Iraq that required bathroom fixtures to be supplied by Iran.
Latest Headlines
- Judge denies motion to delay Kelly trial
- Panel: FBI slow to join terrorism fight
- Judge says young girl 'welcomed' pedophile
- Honda FourTrax Foreman ATVs recalled
- UPI NewsTrack Entertainment News
- Young Europeans use alcohol to get sex
- Fingerhut pressure washers recalled
- Cattrall says male actors are vain, too
Most Popular
- Fritzl recalls start of incest family
- Food group resumes relief trips to Myanmar
- Lebanese MP asks army to protect Tripoli
- Young Europeans use alcohol to get sex
- Canadian train quarantined after death
- Canada to probe U.S. warships sunk in 1813
- UPI NewsTrack TopNews
- Judge says young girl 'welcomed' pedophile
Walker's World: What price NATO?
Published: March 26, 2008 at 10:48 AM
By MARTIN WALKER
UPI Editor Emeritus
WASHINGTON, March 26 (UPI) -- The summit in London Thursday between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his host, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, is likely to hinge on the price of NATO.
It won't look that way. The atmospherics of the summit have been carefully prepared to distract attention from such serious matters. One meeting will be held at the Arsenal stadium, home to an English soccer club whose success has been achieved with some star French players.
And Sarkozy's celebrated new wife, Carla Bruni, former model, pop star and escort to Mick Jagger and Eric Clapton, will not only accompany her husband, but the presidential couple will get royal approval with an overnight stay at Windsor Castle.
With such photo opportunities, it may be a challenge for the media to focus on the substance of the meeting. That would be a pity, because the critical issue is important.
Sarkozy, the most pro-American and Atlanticist French leader for a generation, says he wants to rejoin the NATO alliance as a full member. Since 1966, when Charles de Gaulle withdrew and ordered all NATO forces and the alliance headquarters out of France, the country has been a member of the political committee but not of the joint military command structure.
Sarkozy is also holding out some more carrots, including the proposed deployment of a further 1,000 French troops to Afghanistan and more cooperation with Britain on nuclear energy and immigration control.
In return, Sarkozy wants British support at next week's NATO summit in Bucharest for the French plan for the European Union to build its own defense capability and its own general staff planning system within the overall NATO structure.
That does not sound alarming. Indeed, the latest official U.S. statement sounded welcoming. Speaking to the Paris Press Club last month, U.S. Ambassador to NATO Victoria Nuland said: "We agree with France-Europe needs, the United States needs, NATO needs, the democratic world needs -- a stronger, more capable European defense capacity. We need a stronger EU, we need a stronger NATO and if Afghanistan has taught us anything, we need a stronger, more seamless relationship between them. … In Washington, leaders of all stripes are calling for more, not less Europe, and applauding President Sarkozy's appeal for the European Union and NATO to 'march hand in hand.'"
The problem, as British and American defense chiefs are warning, and as the conservative Washington-based Heritage Foundation argued in a report this week, such a move "threatens to tear NATO in half."
While it makes obvious sense for the EU and NATO to work far more closely together and to combine the best of one another's strengths in hard and soft power, there is a risk, which explains why the United States and Britain have resisted such a move for the past decade and more. Such an EU core inside NATO could slowly but surely absorb and eventually take over the NATO organization, easing the Americans out and leaving an essentially European structure behind.
Consider the following recent remarks from leading French officials.
First, Jean-Pierre Jouyet, French minister for Europe, in a speech this month: "Europe will be radiant, she will be a political power if she has the necessary tools in terms of defense. ... We want to make openings with regard to NATO. But let's be clear, we are ready to make these advances only if they allow the strengthening of a real European security and defense policy."
Second, Herve Morin, French defense minister, speaking last November: "With the common currency, we have created a strong symbol for Europe. But nothing can better express the European community of fate than common defense, a common sense of Europe's threats and security interests."
Third, Sarkozy, speaking last July: "The basis for a European Defense exists. We must make it grow. I want Europe to be capable of ensuring its security autonomously."
A European defense capability would be a fine thing, so long as it did not supersede or seek to replace NATO, and those French speeches make it clear that their real priority is with Europe, rather than with the Atlantic Alliance.
As the Heritage Foundation report stressed: "It is difficult to see how a greater EU defense capability will actually strengthen the NATO mission or the broader trans-Atlantic alliance. As a supranational body, the European Union has frequently clashed with the United States over major foreign policy questions -- from Iraq and Iran to America's overall handling of the war against Islamist terrorism. Washington and Brussels are frequently oceans apart on some of the biggest issues of the day, and encouraging a bigger military role for the EU can only make NATO's task more complicated."
Brown is nervous of reaching any deal with Sarkozy that could lead to headlines in the London tabloids about the incorporation of British troops into some new "Euro-army." His defense chiefs are even more nervous of linking their security fate with the ever less militarily capable Europeans, rather than the highly capable Americans.
The likely compromise is for Brown to agree to the creation of a new planning unit that would seek to coordinate the "soft power" capabilities of the EU's civilian staff (including policing) with NATO's military "hard power."
But that speech from the U.S. ambassador to NATO has left the British looking nervously over their shoulders and wondering if the Bush administration is still firm on NATO, when they would all very much rather leave NATO as it is and get on with watching the delightful Madame Sarkozy.
UPI Editor Emeritus
WASHINGTON, March 26 (UPI) -- The summit in London Thursday between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his host, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, is likely to hinge on the price of NATO.
It won't look that way. The atmospherics of the summit have been carefully prepared to distract attention from such serious matters. One meeting will be held at the Arsenal stadium, home to an English soccer club whose success has been achieved with some star French players.
And Sarkozy's celebrated new wife, Carla Bruni, former model, pop star and escort to Mick Jagger and Eric Clapton, will not only accompany her husband, but the presidential couple will get royal approval with an overnight stay at Windsor Castle.
With such photo opportunities, it may be a challenge for the media to focus on the substance of the meeting. That would be a pity, because the critical issue is important.
Sarkozy, the most pro-American and Atlanticist French leader for a generation, says he wants to rejoin the NATO alliance as a full member. Since 1966, when Charles de Gaulle withdrew and ordered all NATO forces and the alliance headquarters out of France, the country has been a member of the political committee but not of the joint military command structure.
Sarkozy is also holding out some more carrots, including the proposed deployment of a further 1,000 French troops to Afghanistan and more cooperation with Britain on nuclear energy and immigration control.
In return, Sarkozy wants British support at next week's NATO summit in Bucharest for the French plan for the European Union to build its own defense capability and its own general staff planning system within the overall NATO structure.
That does not sound alarming. Indeed, the latest official U.S. statement sounded welcoming. Speaking to the Paris Press Club last month, U.S. Ambassador to NATO Victoria Nuland said: "We agree with France-Europe needs, the United States needs, NATO needs, the democratic world needs -- a stronger, more capable European defense capacity. We need a stronger EU, we need a stronger NATO and if Afghanistan has taught us anything, we need a stronger, more seamless relationship between them. … In Washington, leaders of all stripes are calling for more, not less Europe, and applauding President Sarkozy's appeal for the European Union and NATO to 'march hand in hand.'"
The problem, as British and American defense chiefs are warning, and as the conservative Washington-based Heritage Foundation argued in a report this week, such a move "threatens to tear NATO in half."
While it makes obvious sense for the EU and NATO to work far more closely together and to combine the best of one another's strengths in hard and soft power, there is a risk, which explains why the United States and Britain have resisted such a move for the past decade and more. Such an EU core inside NATO could slowly but surely absorb and eventually take over the NATO organization, easing the Americans out and leaving an essentially European structure behind.
Consider the following recent remarks from leading French officials.
First, Jean-Pierre Jouyet, French minister for Europe, in a speech this month: "Europe will be radiant, she will be a political power if she has the necessary tools in terms of defense. ... We want to make openings with regard to NATO. But let's be clear, we are ready to make these advances only if they allow the strengthening of a real European security and defense policy."
Second, Herve Morin, French defense minister, speaking last November: "With the common currency, we have created a strong symbol for Europe. But nothing can better express the European community of fate than common defense, a common sense of Europe's threats and security interests."
Third, Sarkozy, speaking last July: "The basis for a European Defense exists. We must make it grow. I want Europe to be capable of ensuring its security autonomously."
A European defense capability would be a fine thing, so long as it did not supersede or seek to replace NATO, and those French speeches make it clear that their real priority is with Europe, rather than with the Atlantic Alliance.
As the Heritage Foundation report stressed: "It is difficult to see how a greater EU defense capability will actually strengthen the NATO mission or the broader trans-Atlantic alliance. As a supranational body, the European Union has frequently clashed with the United States over major foreign policy questions -- from Iraq and Iran to America's overall handling of the war against Islamist terrorism. Washington and Brussels are frequently oceans apart on some of the biggest issues of the day, and encouraging a bigger military role for the EU can only make NATO's task more complicated."
Brown is nervous of reaching any deal with Sarkozy that could lead to headlines in the London tabloids about the incorporation of British troops into some new "Euro-army." His defense chiefs are even more nervous of linking their security fate with the ever less militarily capable Europeans, rather than the highly capable Americans.
The likely compromise is for Brown to agree to the creation of a new planning unit that would seek to coordinate the "soft power" capabilities of the EU's civilian staff (including policing) with NATO's military "hard power."
But that speech from the U.S. ambassador to NATO has left the British looking nervously over their shoulders and wondering if the Bush administration is still firm on NATO, when they would all very much rather leave NATO as it is and get on with watching the delightful Madame Sarkozy.
© 2008 United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any form.
This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any form.
» Next in Emerging Threats - Analysis:
Commentary: Of yarmulkes and epithets