Posted on 06/28/2004 2:39:00 AM PDT by familyop
NATO leaders moved on from bitter rows over Iraq today and turned to tough talks on reshaping their alliance for new security threats.
"A period of distance between Chirac, Schroeder, Blair and Bush is over and a new period of collaboration has begun," declared Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi after a dinner in Istanbul for the leaders of NATO's 26 nations.
NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer cited the alliance's plans to widen its peace mission in Afghanistan as proof it can project stability far from national borders.
The leaders will also agree to train the insurgency-beset security forces of Iraq's new interim government, which formally took over from the US-led occupying authority today, two days ahead of schedule.
"We need training and assistance inside Iraq," Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari told reporters after meeting British Prime Minister Tony Blair on the sidelines of the summit.
"We need to build our capabilities to rise to the challenge and we have asked NATO to take Iraq seriously."
But the deal on helping Iraq falls far short of the boots-on-the-ground role Washington had sought for the alliance, which was scotched by French and German resistance.
And it only came after wrangling that echoed last year's pre-war row over boosting Iraq neighbour Turkey's defences.
Indeed, while US officials briefed reporters in glowing terms about the training agreement, France was distinctly cool.
French officials said it would be a job for allies rather than the alliance as a whole, and there would "no NATO flag" in Iraq.
"France will continue to make known its concerns and reservations with respect to a NATO role, as such," Catherine Colonna, spokeswoman for French President Jacques Chirac, said.
The communique on Iraq was deliberately vague, offering NATO's assistance to Baghdad and going on to say merely: "We ... encourage nations to contribute to the training of the Iraqi armed force".
One of the biggest challenges faced by NATO is how best to transform an alliance geared to counter Soviet might into a credible force for new threats such as terrorism.
NATO nations pledged at a 2002 summit in Prague to modernise their armed forces and have since set up a quick-reaction force for rapid deployment to hotspots.
But with defence budgets declining or stagnant in most European countries, delivery has been unimpressive.
"Our decisions here today . . . will ensure that NATO has the political and military tools available to continue to shape international security for the better - and that our means will continue to match our missions," said de Hoop Scheffer.
This is somewhat of a strange one, BTW. Reuters is usually very left/liberal and often anti-Bush. The Age is often pro-American and pro-Bush. The credit/byline is at the end of the piece ("-Reuters") instead of at the beginning.
But all-in-all, IMO, the column makes the USA look pretty good. ...your input?
IMO I believe "we" walked away with the hatchet buried in our necks.
"IMO I believe "we" walked away with the hatchet buried in our necks."
Oh? ...in what way? Are you referring to European anti-American sentiment of the recent past and the way they left us footing the bill or something new that I might have missed?
"IMO I believe "we" walked away with the hatchet buried in our necks."
I took your statement quoted above to possibly mean that they have somehow hurt us terribly and defeated us.
If you are saying, on the other hand, that the French and Germans are ineffective backstabbers, I can agree with that. They are starting to look like a group of international clowns. Most of what they've said and done to date has been proven erroneous and stupid.
"In other words...they still need our military protection when they need it."
I agree with that for sure. They don't even have enough of a military to protect themselves, although they've talked about building one while complaining about us.
The the 'TOON USED NATO TO SLAUGHTER THE SERBS TO KEEP HIS STUPID ASS OUT OF THE NEWS.
Sounds like a great NBA nickname.
Take THAT, John Kerry, you LOSER !!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.