La vicesecretaria general de la OTAN visita Azerbaiyán para asistir a una importante conferencia sobre la mujer, la paz y la seguridad

Group photo at the NATO/EAPC High Level Conference on Women, Peace and Security

La conferencia, organizada conjuntamente por la OTAN y Azerbaiyán, es la primera desde que los líderes de la OTAN acordaron una Política y un Plan de Acción de Mujeres, Paz y Seguridad revisados en la Cumbre de Bruselas en julio de 2018.

” Integración, inclusión e integridad. Estas serán las palabras de advertencia a medida que avanzamos en nuestra agenda para hacer de la igualdad de género una realidad cotidiana para las mujeres y las niñas de todo el mundo, ” dijo la vicesecretaria general en su discurso.

NATO Update. 21.09.2018. Leer más

Se adjunta un mapa del Cáucaso, con objeto de comprobar la ubicación de Azerbaijan con respecto al mar Caspio y a Rusia:


La vicesecretaria general de la OTAN, Rose Gottemoeller, visita Georgia

Joint press conference with NATO Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller and the First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Georgia, David Dondua

NATO Deputy Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller is in Tbilisi today (21 September 2018) to reaffirm NATO’s strong commitment to Georgia.

NATO Update. 21.09.2018. Leer más


Se remite un mapa de la región del Caúcaso, en donde se encuentra Georgia, a cuyo gobierno se le “han independizado” tres partes de su territorio. Si entra en la OTAN y se declara que son partes del mismo, solicitando el apoyo de toda la Alianza, se podría crear un problema grave.

Es una de las “amenazas” que más “siente” Putin.

Texto de octubre de 2015

A world without NATO?

Michael Rühle heads the Energy Security Section of NATO’s Emerging Security Challenges Division. Previously, he served as a speechwriter for six NATO Secretaries General. The views expressed are his own.

What is published in NATO Review does not necessarily represent the official position or policy of member governments, or of NATO.

Fifteen years ago, when the Iraq war divided the NATO Allies and some even talked of the end of the Atlantic Alliance, veteran journalist Jim Hoagland remained calm. Predictions about the imminent demise of NATO had been around for ages, he said during a brainstorm with NATO ambassadors. And, with a wink, he even put some of the blame on fellow journalists: “Whenever we at the Washington Post have a slow news day, we publish a ‘Whither NATO?’ piece.”

Hoagland’s serenity proved justified: the transatlantic relationship quickly recovered.

But times change. Today, the European Union struggles with numerous crises, from “Brexit” to burgeoning nationalism. Formats like the G-7 no longer seem to generate the common leadership on global issues that Western nations have sought to exert for so long. The narrative about the “demise of the West” appears to be gaining more and more traction. And the notion that even the venerable NATO may well be dispensable is no longer confined to the “usual suspects” from the academic ivory tower or the wilder shores of isolationism.

What would a world without NATO look like?

It is a useful question to ask, because such a counterfactual experiment helps to sharpen the focus on what would be at stake. After all, the end of NATO would mean much more than just the disappearance of a bureaucracy in Brussels. It would mean nothing less than the end of an institutionalised political and military link between Europe and North America.

The political and military consequences of such a development would be manifold – and dangerous.

The end of collective defence

The dissolution of the Atlantic Alliance would mean the end of transatlantic collective defence. Europe would have to provide for its security without the United States. For some Euro-enthusiasts, who have long sought Europe’s “emancipation” from the United States, such a prospect might seem like a dream come true. For those, by contrast, who still view the transatlantic community as a unique and indispensable achievement, it would look like a nightmare.

Building a purely European defence would overwhelm the Europeans politically, financially and militarily. Attempting to compensate even partially for the departure of the United States would mean dramatic increases in defence spending and a radical overhaul of European arms development and procurement procedures. Even more, it would ultimately require a genuine European security policy, including a consensus on a European nuclear deterrent, which is nowhere in sight.

In other words, the disappearance of NATO would call for a further deepening of European integration in the very field where integration is most difficult. And all this would come at a time when many nation states want less Europe, not more.

An increase in Russia’s power in Europe

By contrast, the end of NATO would dramatically increase Russia’s position in European security. With the United States effectively ceding its status as a “European power”, the temptation and the opportunities for Russia to divide or intimidate its European neighbours would grow.

It has been said that NATO’s continued existence creates a problem for Russia. That may well be true, but the disappearance of the Alliance would create a problem for Europe: without the NATO protective umbrella, Europe would lack the self-confidence required for a coherent and constructive engagement with the Eurasian power. Some European countries would seek their own deals with Moscow.

Moreover, for many countries in the post-Soviet space, which want to demonstrate their independence from Russia through their relations with NATO, the end of an American security role in Europe would be a strategic disaster. The new “post-American” power balance in Eurasia would condemn them to remain permanently in Russia’s sphere of influence.

Diminishing military interoperability

And there is more. The end of NATO would also deprive Europeans and North Americans of an important framework of legitimacy for the use of military power.

Without the broader NATO framework, the political and military stamina required for dangerous and long-term stabilisation missions, such as Afghanistan, could not be generated. Ad hoc military operations among the United States, Canada and European countries would still be possible – but the disappearance of NATO’s common defence planning and exercise practice would result in ever-diminishing military interoperability among them. Without the United States as the military centre of gravity, European military standards would most likely regress towards the lowest common denominator.

Sooner rather than later, the United States and most of its former allies would lose their ability to cooperate militarily. Without the tried and tested NATO procedures and standards, even the United States’ role as a military enabler (“leading from behind”) would become far more difficult.

The regionalisation of security

If NATO ceased to exist, it would inevitably encourage the regionalisation of security. Without the Alliance as a strategic bracket for bridging different regional security interests, southern European countries would tend to focus on the Maghreb and the Middle East, while eastern European countries would focus more on Russia. However, without the United States as their security backbone, none of these groupings would have enough political cohesion and military strength to exert a lasting influence on their respective regions of interest. The result would be a further weakening of Europe as a strategic actor.

NATO’s unique network of partnerships with dozens of countries from all over the globe would disappear as well, forcing Europe and North America to fall back on a host of complicated bilateral relationships.

Wider implications for Allies and partners

The end of the Alliance would also be an enormous challenge for Allies such as Canada or Turkey, as they do not have the opportunity to organise their ties to Europe through membership of the European Union.

It would even pose a major dilemma for non-NATO countries such as Finland and Sweden. Since their pragmatic policy of military non-alignment is made feasible by a continuing American role in European security, an end of this unique role would significantly change these countries’ strategic environment and could reduce their latitude as engines of regional cooperation.

Finally, without the prospect of NATO accession, the West would also lose much of its influence on the reform processes in the candidate countries from southeast Europe to the Caucasus.

A bad deal

And what about transatlantic burden-sharing? Would the end of NATO not at least ensure that the United States were finally relieved of an “unfair” financial and military burden?

Hardly. The United States defence budget reflects the military expenditures of a global power. It therefore goes well beyond NATO, which at the highest estimate represents no more than 15 per cent of total United States defence spending. Consequently, the dissolution of NATO would translate into relatively small savings for the United States, yet Washington would lose allies, military bases and the political predictability established through daily multilateral consultations in the Alliance framework.

The geopolitical winners would be China, Russia and all those who, by using the clarion call of the need to build a “multipolar world”, seek to weaken the United States’ role in upholding international order.

In sum, for all these reasons, a world without NATO would be a bad deal for the United States, for its Allies, and for partners in Europe and beyond.

NATO Review. 29.08.2018

YouTube. Michael Rühle comments on the role of NATO and energy security

NATO Update de 24.08.2018

Commander-designate of NATO Mission Iraq announced

Canada’s Department of National Defence announced on Wednesday (22 August 2018) that Major-General Dany Fortin has been selected to lead the new NATO Mission Iraq. Launched at the Brussels Summit in July, the mission builds on NATO’s efforts to train the Iraqi forces as they work to prevent the re-emergence of ISIS and other terrorist groups. Led by Canada, NATO’s non-combat mission will include hundreds of trainers, and will also involve setting up military schools to increase the professionalism of the Iraqi forces.

Allies to receive first shipment of Precision Guided Munitions acquired through NATO

Today (22 August 2018), the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA) received the first lot of Precision Guided Munitions (PGMs) acquired through a NATO project involving 11 Allies and one NATO partner.

NATO and Japan conduct exercise in the Baltic Sea

Naval forces from Standing NATO Maritime Group One conducted a passing exercise with a Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force squadron in the Baltic Sea on Tuesday (21 August 2018). NATO ships sailed alongside cadet training vessel JS Kashima and destroyer JS Makinami for the drills.

Marines advise Afghan partners in Sangin

U.S. Marine Corps advisors with Task Force Southwest and Afghan National Army (ANA) soldiers with 2nd Brigade, Afghan National Army 215th Corps, partnered for an advisory mission at Camp Nolay in Sangin district, August 1-16. (Courtesy of Resolute Support Mission)

Belgium and Germany to take over NATO’s Baltic Air Policing

The 48th rotation of detachments contributing to NATO’s Baltic Air Policing mission is imminent. From September 2018, the Belgian Air Force will take the lead over the mission at Šiauliai, Lithuania, while the German Air Force will augment out of Ämari, Estonia. (Courtesy of Allied Air Command)

The Science for Peace and Security Programme celebrates its 60th anniversary

2018 marks the 60th anniversary of the NATO Science for Peace and Security (SPS) Programme, which has built a strong track record of promoting scientific projects and collaboration among scientists from NATO countries, maximising the return on research investments and strengthening the transatlantic bond.

NATO Review 17.08.2018. The Science for Peace and Security Programme celebrates its 60th anniversary