Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts

Monday, November 2, 2009

U.S. Navy reports American vessel came under pirate gunfire

On Monday, approximately twelve Somali pirates attempted to board the MV Harriette, an American vessel out of Oyster Bay, N.Y. The Harriette was returning from offloading US food aid in Kenya. The pirates attacked in two small boats, but were unable to board after the Harriette's captain took evasive maneuvers. After failing to board, the pirates shot at the ship, damaging a lifeboat, but not injuring any of the 21-person crew. The United States Navy is part of the NATO anti-piracy force patrolling the waters off the Horn of Africa. Read more at NYT.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Defense Secretary Gate plans to speak with NATO about Afghanistan

Defense Secretary Robert Gates plans to meet with NATO and push for support for training of Afghani security forces. Secretary Gate flew to Slovakia today and cited General McChrystal in the need for more allied support in Afghanistan. President Obama has yet to decide on whether to commit more troops. To read more, click here NYTimes.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

The US Cannot Wait for Runoff Elections in Afghanistan

While on his way to Tokyo today, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that NATO/ISAF members should not wait on a runoff election in Afghanistan to increase troop levels, nor, he said, should they expect the US to provide all additional troops. RFU/RL reported today that Gates said that he did not need a US decision about increasing troop levels to talk to NATO allies about increasing their support in Afghanistan.
It is believed that General McCrystal, top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, told president Obama that he needs somewhere between 10,000 and 40,000 additional troops to avoid failure of the NATO mission.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

US Missile Shield Talks, Non-NATO Members, and Russia

RIA Novosti reports that Russia has expressed concern about the United States' missile shield talks with non-NATO ally Ukraine.

As we noted in a previous post, some analysts merely viewed previous missile shield agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic as useful bogeymen for Russian policymakers (despite the minimal actual strategic threat). Although Ukraine is not included in NATO, is this merely a cosmetic difference? And if so, is this simple difference enough to give Moscow a new "useful whipping boy?"

If one can answer affirmatively to all of the above, any such US missile-shield talks may offer the Russians the excuse they need to avoid cooperating on UNSC Iran sanctions.