fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
Afghanistan is 'sucking oxygen' out of NATO.
Trefor Moss JDW Correspondent - London
The future of NATO could be "very much on the line" if Afghanistan continues to monopolise the alliance's efforts, a senior NATO source warned in mid-April.
Addressing an audience under the privilege of the Chatham House Rule, the source said that the current situation - whereby Afghanistan was "the first, second and third item on the agenda at NATO HQ" - could not safely continue for too much longer. The Afghan mission was "sucking oxygen" out of the alliance, he said, adding that NATO "would be in very deep trouble ... if three years from now [Afghanistan] was still all-consuming".
The alliance also needed major reform if it was to remain viable over the next 10 or 20 years, he continued. In particular, he pointed to a need for greater expeditionary capabilities and for a re-assessment of the extent of the organisation's ambition. NATO aims to have the ability to sustain two major operations and six minor ones, for example, and yet the alliance is "doing one plus one [Afghanistan and Kosovo] and [it is] about out right now", he observed.
Defining the limits of enlargement and updating the definition of security to shift the focus away from expressly military actions were also identified as priorities for the alliance.
However, the NATO source suggested that the Bucharest summit on 2-4 April had proved more positive than many in the military establishment had been expecting and developments there had given the alliance the "momentum" to succeed in Afghanistan as long as it has "patience and enough time".
Trefor Moss JDW Correspondent - London
The future of NATO could be "very much on the line" if Afghanistan continues to monopolise the alliance's efforts, a senior NATO source warned in mid-April.
Addressing an audience under the privilege of the Chatham House Rule, the source said that the current situation - whereby Afghanistan was "the first, second and third item on the agenda at NATO HQ" - could not safely continue for too much longer. The Afghan mission was "sucking oxygen" out of the alliance, he said, adding that NATO "would be in very deep trouble ... if three years from now [Afghanistan] was still all-consuming".
The alliance also needed major reform if it was to remain viable over the next 10 or 20 years, he continued. In particular, he pointed to a need for greater expeditionary capabilities and for a re-assessment of the extent of the organisation's ambition. NATO aims to have the ability to sustain two major operations and six minor ones, for example, and yet the alliance is "doing one plus one [Afghanistan and Kosovo] and [it is] about out right now", he observed.
Defining the limits of enlargement and updating the definition of security to shift the focus away from expressly military actions were also identified as priorities for the alliance.
However, the NATO source suggested that the Bucharest summit on 2-4 April had proved more positive than many in the military establishment had been expecting and developments there had given the alliance the "momentum" to succeed in Afghanistan as long as it has "patience and enough time".
