Issues Navigator

Global Challenges

Strategic Regions

Domestic Debates

Tag cloud

See All Tags

March 27, 2010 |  11 comments |  Print  Your Opinion  

Brussels Forum

A Joint NATO-Russia Missile Shield

Brussels Forum: NATO Secretary General Rasmussen called for Russia to be included in a new Euroatlantic missile defense shield to protect against threats from would-be nuclear states like Iran. Rasmussen was addressing the Brussels Forum, an annual high-level conference on transatlantic relations.

NATO Secretary General Rasmussen argued: “We need a missile defense system that includes not just all countries of NATO, but Russia too. (…) One security roof that we support together, and that we operate together. One security roof that protects us all.”

Mr. Rasmussen singled out Iran -- which he accused of playing “hide-and-seek with the international community” -- as a potential security threat to Alliance members as it developed missiles that put Russia and countries on NATO’s southern flank at risk.

Watch his speech in the video below:


"
Build a new Atlanticism"

European Commission President Barroso called for a more dynamic transatlantic relationship based on results rather than process and on strategic dialogue between leaders over an “endless lists of issues.” “We must go beyond traditional Atlanticism and build a new Atlanticism.”

Watch his keynote speech at the Brussels Forum in the video below:

 

"The Transatlantic Relationship: Does it Matter?"

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Baroness Cathy Ashton, Estonian President Toomas Ilves, Directory of Policy Planning at the US Department of State Anne-Marie Slaughter, US Senator Voinovich discuss the multiploar dimension of transatlantic relations.

Watch the debate moderated by David Ignatius of the Washington Post in the video below:



Brussels Forum
is an annual high-level meeting of the most influential North American and European political, corporate, and intellectual leaders to address pressing challenges currently facing both sides of the Atlantic. Participants include heads of state, senior officials from the European Union institutions and the member states, US Cabinet officials, Congressional representatives, Parliamentarians, academics, and media.

  • 8
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this Article! What's this?

 
Tags: | Atlanticism | Barroso | Rasmussen | NATO | Brussels Forum | GMF |
 
Comments
Olga  Kolesnichenko

March 28, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
First of all I very appreciate the opportunity to hearing such great and important Forum. I stronger agree with NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Secretary General has mentioned relationship with Russia almost in the every speech which dedicated of international agenda. Let me say, please, that NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen is the wisest politician that we could imagine at this high post. And also Anders Fogh Rasmussen is the most bear and forbear in particular with Russia because Russia is a very complex country.
Transatlantic community shouldn't stop to move towards common system of Missile Defence since the Cuban Missile Crisis (Caribbean Crisis) had emerged. That was the start point of real understanding of vulnerability all of us. And that was end of irresponsibility. So, the way was difficult and nations moved to result very slow. Everybody decreased the level of trust and level of belief sometimes. But nobody wants to return to 'prewar level willingness', the real willingness that had occurred during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
So now we need the strongest politicians who will be able to achieve the 'Olimpic prize' on this hard way calling to build common system of Missile Defence Shield. That is why, I think, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen talks about NATO-Russia common system of Missile Defence Shield as often as possible. And I believe that Russians will understand importance of Anders Fogh Rasmussen proposal. I believe that NATO's boss like wise viking can achieve the result.
 
Member deleted

March 28, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
It is not only the Cuba crisis. The southern hemisphere is going to witness a situation were failed states neighbor nuclear powers and democracies. Hence, it is difficult to predict or even contain worst case scenarios. A Missile Shield or even the ability to take bogeys out of the air, whatever they may witness as payload, is also a UN contribution.

Lets connect all Space Harbor with a red telephone and if a military observe the start of a non registered rocket launch (NRL), such a likely "code black", the Missile Shield will be able to save millions of millions of lives, if extended to naval missile launchers for example.

Why not????
 
Member deleted

March 28, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
It is difficult to understand why Gen. Rasmussen is scared to death with the prospect of Iran going nuclear although Nato has already stocked up thousands of nuclear missiles. Is it now that they are seeking for extra defense support from the Russians??
 
Olga  Kolesnichenko

March 29, 2010

  • 0
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
I very regret about horrible bloodshed terroristic attack in Moscow metro. And I have to say that Russians don't think that terrorism belong Muslim religion, but of cause the numerous of terroristic events showed us that Muslims are very accessible for terrorist's propaganda. It doesn't mean that terrorist and Muslim is the same. Of cause not. What is the problem? Poverty, absence of education. The most important problem - women rights on the East. Suicide-killers are the victims too. We all understand it. So whose is fault in Moscow metro bloodshed cases? It is clear that it is corruption in Russian authority. In 2004 when had been the same explosion in Moscow metro (41 were killed and 250 were injured) Russian authority swore that explosions in Moscow never would repeat. And so, it repeated again. Where are the measures for prevention the bombing in metro?
And also I have to say about political consequences. In my opinion the terrorists mustn't receive their goals. International community has to continue supporting the economic prosperity and nuclear peace programme in Iran in particular. And simultaneously NATO and Russia must build the common Missile Defence Shield.
 
Greg Randolph Lawson

March 29, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
The notion that Russia and NATO could cooperate to develop and deploy a common missile defense system has obvious allure for the reasons mentioned above by Samir with respect to failing states and proliferation of nucelar techonology and, likely, weapons.

However, the U.S., Europe and Russia do not have congruous geopolitical interests. There has to be at least some skepticism as to whether an effort at cooperation could result in a "Trojan Horse" effect to the extent that sharing such critical technology could forsake advantages that NATO should not give away.

Any cooperation must be well thought out with serious security protocols put in place. I suspect there is still a bit too much lack of trust on both the NATO-American and the Russian sides for this to work practically.

Further exploration should not be dismissed, but let's not get carried away by the prospects of success.
 
Member deleted

March 29, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Dear Olga,

remembering Stalin and the Communist framework makes me ask you in how far Russians may be affected by propaganda?

But let us discuss the Missile Shield here, before I feel very much motivated to discuss Russian foreign policy in the Balkans and policies in Chechnya, that would lead to a widely held explanation for the Geo-politic correlation between predominately Islamic regions and terrorism today... This is not in your interest here, I think, as you are located in Moscow, is it?
 
Member deleted

March 29, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Oh my, Olga,

I just read what happened in Moscow some hours ago, therefore please accept my apologies (???), for my indeed insensitive comment!!!
However if we talk about female suicide bombers in the Western World we use the description "Black Widow"... Police hunt 'Black Widow' suicide bomb gang
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article7080215.ece

This breed of terrorists are recruited among women who lost their beloved ones during civil wars for the first and foremost.

Sorry
 
Olga  Kolesnichenko

March 29, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Dear Samir,
Thank you for your attention. I remind that more than several millions Muslims live in Russia. And among people who were killed today in Moscow metro were Muslims too, together with Russians, together with Israelites, together with others. Russia has always been the bridge between West and East. And even after Chechny war and after huge terroristic attacks Russia had never accepted islamophobia. Terrorism is our common world problem. It concerns everybody.
 
Olga  Kolesnichenko

March 29, 2010

  • 2
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
Dear Samir,
I agree with concerning about female suicide bombers. I think that International community and NATO should develop a new approach to support women in Muslims world. It is very difficult but it is about human rights. I am assured that suicide killers (women or young men) were the main victims of terrorism. They would have become doctors, teachers, engineers, journalists, scientists, mothers. But they blast theirself. International community must resist to involvement people to be suicide bombers. It is responsibility of all world community. And I repeat NATO can propose a new more wide approach to avoid emerging suicide bombers.
If you talk about Stalin, I agree, it was the huge evil.
 
Unregistered User

April 4, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
The desperate attempts to provide 'security' for nations or groups of nations is now entering the area of 'science fiction' I feel.
More and more people are trained in armed forces throughout the world. In many cases these armies are turned inwards on their own people, often in support of big business, which wishes to exploit 'natural resources', frequently involving the killing or despersal of native people.
Would it not be a more worthwhile project to ensure that everyone in the world has access to clean water and sanitation and the ability to grow food locally? Education, available for all, and sustainable energy and infrastructure are the next essentials.
As part of education, the methods of Gandhi and Martin Luther King could well be promoted, as sound ways to resolve conflict, rather than murder, which is currently promoted by most countries and alliances.
 
Member deleted

April 4, 2010

  • 1
  •  
  •  
  • No rating possible
  • No rating possible
I like this comment! What's this?
It seems that the ultimate aim of NATO has been developing into one of military globalization eventually to protect mankind from UFO's or invasions by the inhabitants of outer space.

On the other hand although it may be considered to be utopic, I personally think it is the surest way to accomplish world peace to globalize NATO as a first step towards full globalization of all human beings...
Tags: | NATO | world peace |
 

Commenting has been deactivated in the archive. We appreciate your comments on our more recent articles at atlantic-community.org


Community

You are in the archive of all articles published on atlantic-community.org from 2007 to 2012. To read the latest articles from our open think tank and network with community members, please go to our new website