Archive
NATO: U.S.-Led Global Military Alliance With 78 Members and Partners
NATO: U.S.-Led Global Military Alliance With 78 Members and Partners
The 28-member North Atlantic Treaty Organization officially lists the following 40 nations as partners.
With the 22 members of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, all but Russia are also members of the Partnership for Peace program, which graduated twelve nations – Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia – to full membership from 1999-2009.
Other NATO partners not listed below include:
Oman and Saudi Arabia, de facto members of the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative.
Libya, which late last year NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen identified as a prospective member of the Mediterranean Dialogue.
Kosovo, not recognized by a majority of the world’s nations but in fact the first NATO pseudo-state.
Other countries supplying troops serving under NATO command in Afghanistan that are not formal members of the partnerships itemized below:
Colombia, El Salvador (according to then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates earlier and as recently as yesterday by U.S. ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder), Malaysia, Singapore and Tonga.
Somalia (Puntland), used by NATO for its Operation Ocean Shield in the Gulf of Aden.
In all, 78 nations on all six inhabited continents.
Partners bordering China: Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Pakistan and Tajikistan.
Members and partners bordering Russia: Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mongolia, Norway, Poland and Ukraine.
Members and partners bordering Iran: Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey and Turkmenistan, with Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates directly across it in the Persian Gulf.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Partners
NATO cooperates with a range of international organizations and countries in different structures. Below is a list of these partners with links to their information servers.
Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC)
The EAPC consists of all NATO Member countries and the following partner countries:
NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue
The following seven countries of the Mediterranean region are currently involved:
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
Algeria | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Egypt | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Israel |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Jordan | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Mauritania | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Morocco | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Tunisia | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Istanbul Cooperation Initiative (ICI)
To date, the following four countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council have joined:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
 |
Bahrain | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Qatar | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Kuwait | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
United Arab Emirates | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners across the globe
In addition to its formal partnerships, NATO cooperates with a range of countries which are not part of these structures. Often referred to as “Partners across the globe”, these countries develop cooperation with NATO in areas of mutual interest, including emerging security challenges, and some contribute actively to NATO operations either militarily or in some other way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
 |
Afghanistan | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Australia | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Iraq | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Japan | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Pakistan | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
 |
Republic of Korea | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
New Zealand | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Mongolia | |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
International Organizations
In addition to its partnerships with countries, NATO cooperates with a range of international organizations.
- Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.
NATO’s New Battlefield: Pakistan
Dawn
March 31, 2012
Salala report
Selected and translated by Zaheer Mahmood Siddiqui
Dozens of Pakistani troops were martyred or injured in a barbaric attack by US-led Nato helicopters on the Salala check post…[T]he US military has obstinately put the entire blame on Pakistani troops in the two investigations.
[A] US military investigation exonerated the Americans from any aggression. A second inquiry by the Pentagon to determine whether any American military personnel should be punished said “no”, justifying the action through the childish defence of the Americans firing in self-defence…
The inquiry report further claimed that Pakistani troops fired first from two check posts that were not on Nato maps and that they kept firing even after the Americans tried to warn them that they were shooting at coalition forces. The US-led Nato soldiers retaliated in self-defence and the Pakistani troops are solely responsible for the incident.
This is akin to a criminal intimidating the judge…
Let us suppose that our troops fired first. Were they so helpless that they could not hit any helicopter? Not a single attacker was injured in the crossfire that continued for more than one and a half hours. How can this be termed a shootout between the two forces?
The Parliamentary Committee on National Security (PCNS) suggested in the recommendations presented before parliament that the resumption of Nato supplies should be made conditional to an unconditional apology from the US on the Salala airstrikes. But the Washington administration is of the view that if President Obama formally tendered an apology to Pakistan, it would benefit his Republican opponents in the presidential race…So this is a big problem for them. Instead of compensating [Pakistan] or giving assurances that such attacks will not recur, the Americans consider it insulting to apologise over the barbaric act.
This is sheer hypocrisy: to declare a state a coalition partner, use its soil and resources without any hindrance, and violate Pakistan’s territorial sovereignty without any regrets. Adding salt to injury have been the “do more” demands.
Namibia: NATO, EU Flexing Military Muscles Everywhere In The World
The Namibian
March 28, 2012
China-Country Must Close Ranks – Speaker Gurirab
“The world belongs to us all, not only them,” commented National Assembly Speaker Theo-Ben Gurirab, criticising what he called NATO and the European Union (EU) “flexing their muscles everywhere in the world militarily and economically and using massive intelligence and security projections worldwide trying to have their way”.
Addressing a Chinese delegation to Namibia headed by vice chairperson of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC), Hua Jianmin, Gurirab added: “We must resist.”
He said under the “guise of human rights, military intervention and regime change have replaced dialogue and peaceful co-existence in the world”.
And, he said, Africa has once again become “their playground and might-makes-right type of arrogance of power has become an everyday activity”.
“Africa is divided and new forms of horse trading and bribes are undermining solidarity and common purpose among some of our leadership across our common borders. The United Nations itself is divided on the crucial priorities of its charter. The African Union has all but lost its united voice, it seems,” Gurirab said.
Moreover, said Gurirab, south-south cooperation is severely challenged.
“China and Namibia must remain loyal to history and also firmly close ranks in our common pursuit of unity, mutual support and targeted economic and technical cooperation,” he stressed.
West Blocking Investigation Of NATO Victims In Libya: Russian UN Envoy
Itar-Tass
March 30, 2012
Western partners in UN try to downplay NATO’s victims in Libya – Churkin
UNITED NATIONS: Russia continues to ‘closely address’ the issue of civilian casualties in Libya as a result of NATO bombardments, Russia’s UN envoy Vitaly Churkin confirmed on Friday.
“Regrettably, our Western partners in the UN Security Council have been trying to play down and hush up the affair in every way they can,” Churkin told Itar-Tass. “Last time the issue was brought up in the UN Security Council they put forward an amazing excuse to the effect it would be far better to look into the future.”
The Russian diplomat said this attitude “does not hold water.” He pointed out that for the Security Council the question of civilian victims of NATO’s bombardments in Libya “is important, because the deaths among the civilian population was a result of operations approved in this building, and the whole operation was conceived as a means to protect civilians.”
Churkin recalled that as he addressed the UN Security Council on March 12, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov demanded investigation into reports of civilian victims of bombardments in Libya and urged the UN Secretary-General to shed light on that issue, using the Declaration on UN/NATO Secretriat Cooperation, signed in 2008.
In the meantime, as UN officials have said, the UN Secretary-General has no plans for taking any steps along these lines. On Friday journalists asked the UN Secretary General’s deputy spokesman Eduardo del Buey about Ban Ki-moon’s response to the North Atlantic Alliance’s refusal to cooperate with the international commission for the investigation of human rights abuse in Libya the UN Human Rights Council had created. The deputy spokesman looked confused and then said that it depended entirely on the Human Rights Council how to achieve cooperation with NATO.
NATO’s massive air campaign, launched in March 2011 against the Muamar Gaddafi regime, saw 26,000 sorties, including 10,000 attack sorties. According to official reports, the alliance’s planes destroyed 5,900 military targets. The operation ended only after Gaddafi’s physical elimination by Libyan rebels last October.
In its report published on March 2 the UN Human Rights Commission presented evidence of the death of at least 50 civilians as a result of NATO’s air raids. The international human rights organization Amnesty International gathered documentary evidence of the death of at least 55 civilians, including 16 women and 14 children, that NATO’s air strikes had led to. Such cases occurred after air raids on Tripoli, Sirt, Marsa-el Brega, Zliten and Majer.
“Implausibly, NATO insists it knows of no ‘confirmed’ civilian casualties during its entire seven-month Libya bombing campaign,” says an editorial in Friday’s New York Times. “Confirmed” means confirmed by NATO, which has shown little interest in investigating credible independent claims of civilian fatalities, including a 27-page memo submitted by The Times last year documenting nine separate attacks where the evidence pointed to unintended victims.”
The newspaper describes as impermissible NATO’s refusal to cooperate with the UN commission.
“If NATO’s military leaders continue to resist a public inquiry, in concert with the U.N. or by NATO itself, President Obama and other political leaders of the alliance should press them to change their minds,” says the New York Times.
U.S., NATO Massively Expand Sea-Based Interceptor Missile Program
Strategic Culture Foundation
March 29, 2012
The BMD Demands a New Tough Response
Vladimir Kozin*
Edited by RR
=====
The major specific feature of the EPAA first phase was the achievement of the initial capability to hit short, medium and even “intermediate” (including missiles with a range of 3,000-5,500 km) range ballistic missiles, mainly thanks to moving the global missile defense sea component, that is the Aegis command and control multifunctional integrated system with SM-2 and SM-3 interceptors, to European shores.
[T]he USA is a long-time leader in sea-based missile defense systems. At the beginning of 2012 there were a total of 24 Aegis-equipped ships (5 Ticonderoga class cruisers and 19 Arleigh Burke class destroyers) in the US Navy inventory. According to US long-term, thirty-year (2011-2041), shipbuilding program, 84 ships are to be upgraded to acquire the Aegis capability: 10 out of 22 cruisers and practically all destroyers (74 ships).
An Aegis-equipped Ticonderoga cruiser or an Arleigh Burke destroyer is capable of launching up to 30 SM-2 or SM-3 interceptors of various modifications. So the overall number of such “interceptor ships” may grow up to 84, making the total global sea-based interceptor missiles force exceed 2,500.
A sophisticated multilayered and multi-echelon missile defense architecture is being created in the immediate vicinity of Russia, encompassing Europe and Asia. It’s major specific feature is that in any emergency on the international scene, the architecture is going to interact most closely with US and NATO tactical and strategic nuclear potentials.
====
Wrapping up the “sidelines” meeting at the Seoul nuclear summit, Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama acknowledged by mutual consent they failed to get ahead in finding a common stance on the most acute but still unsolved issue of global dimensions – the creation of some kind of “cooperative” Russia-USA/NATO joint ballistic missile defense (BMD) in Europe.
The US President asked for a “time out” till the US presidential campaign is over. He also dropped a hint he would have “more flexibility” concerning missile defense bilateral cooperation prospects if re-elected in November.
Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama confined themselves to an agreement to continue consultations, but not full-scale talks, in the next six-eight months with the participation of technical experts.
Actually the meeting repeated the zero results of the talks in Honolulu in November 2011 followed by the well-known statement by the Russian president listing the military-technical steps to be taken in response to continuation of the US-NATO “missile shield” build-up in Europe while ignoring Russia’s security concerns.
It’s still not known how serious Washington’s intent is to discuss the European missile defense with Russia. The hopes Moscow had to reach a concrete agreement with the USA at the end of last year and before the then-forthcoming event in Seoul the NATO summit in Chicago in May are fading away.
Its looks like Washington has the intention of going on deploying missile defense infrastructure on the European continent and around it using the postponement of decision finding deliberations to its advantage: its plan was wrapped up and made final a long time ago.
First, it’s not known if Barack Obama will continue to be the head of state and supreme commander of the armed forces. If he stays, what will his stance on missile defense be like? Will it be like the present one – “foot dragging”?
Secondly, what will a Republican president-elect do in case he manages to win? Actually, nearly all Republican senators have spoken out against changes in the US stance on missile defense or taking Russia’s concerns into account. Just recently 43 out of 47 Republican Senators signed a warning letter to Obama saying they would not support any limitations concerning the European missile defense component being deployed in case the current administration comes up with such plans.
Let’s remember that during the deliberations on the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START-3) ratification Barack Obama assured the senators that under no circumstances would he introduce “qualitative or quantitative” limitations on the BMD infrastructure or sacrifice US national security interests.
The first phase of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) missile defense plan was successfully fulfilled in 2011, the nest stage of the program is being implemented.
The major specific feature of the EPAA first phase was the achievement of the initial capability to hit short, medium and even “intermediate” (including missiles with a range of 3,000-5,500 km) range ballistic missiles, mainly thanks to moving the global missile defense sea component, that is the Aegis command and control multifunctional integrated system with SM-2 and SM-3 interceptors, to European shores.
It’s worth emphasizing that the USA is a long-time leader in sea-based missile defense systems. At the beginning of 2012 there were a total of 24 Aegis-equipped ships (5 Ticonderoga class cruisers and 19 Arleigh Burke class destroyers) in the US Navy inventory. According to US long-term, thirty-year (2011-2041), shipbuilding program, 84 ships are to be upgraded to acquire the Aegis capability: 10 out of 22 cruisers and practically all destroyers (74 ships).
The naval missile defense component is constantly gaining more importance in the overall missile defense architecture. The plans in force foresee an increase of the number of SM-3 interceptors from 111 in 2011 up to 436 in 2015 and 515 in 2020 (not 50 as some Russian experts say!). An Aegis-equipped Ticonderoga cruiser or an Arleigh Burke destroyer is capable of launching up to 30 SM-2 or SM-3 interceptors of various modifications. So the overall number of such “interceptor ships” may grow up to 84, making the total global sea-based interceptor missiles force exceed 2,500.
Further, NATO missile defense command and control facilities were built while implementing the first stage of the European Phased Adaptive Approach plan. Early warning systems are upgraded, new radars are being installed. Unlike other military programs, national missile defense and its overseas (European) component are immune from budget cuts, its expenditure preserves a stable tendency to grow.
Close Washington allies besides NATO members (like the UK, Spain, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania) are actively joining the program. For instance, Japan, a neutral state that in fact has become an alliance member a long time ago, has contributed to a technological breakthrough in enhancing the interceptors’ capabilities. The technology has been successfully used by the USA to its advantage. Australia and South Korea are long-time missile defense development partners.
A sophisticated multilayered and multi-echelon missile defense architecture is being created in the immediate vicinity of Russia, encompassing Europe and Asia. It’s major specific feature is that in any emergency on the international scene, the architecture is going to interact most closely with US and NATO tactical and strategic nuclear potentials.
Under the circumstances, Russia needs to take a more tough and resolute stance in defending its national security interests. Washington’s attempts to impose discussions on tactical nuclear weapons and make them part of the agenda separately from missile defense plans should be repelled. The deployment of missile defense along with NATO partners and some Asia-Pacific region allies should be taken into account while outlining the pattern of future strategic offensive arms reduction talks.
Finally, Russia should toughen its military-technical and diplomatic-political response to the United States in case it doesn’t realize what kind of adventure it is pushing the world into while vibrantly developing and installing practically everywhere its missile defense components that enhance the US nuclear potential capability. A long-time experience of arms control testifies to the fact that Washington doesn’t understand the language of polite diplomacy, but rather only responds to practical military-technical actions making it also face complex challenges to its own security.
While Russian and US technical experts discuss some missile defense aspects till the end of this year, it’s expedient to come out with a simple but logical step (if such a proposal has not been put forward to the White House as yet): to freeze further deployment of US and NATO missile defense in Europe till the experts’ work is done. It will make their efforts more fruitful.
*Vladimir Kozin is principal researcher at the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, member of the Expert Council of the Inter-Agency Working Group under the administration of the President of the Russian Federation for the interaction with NATO in missile defense.
Pentagon: NATO To Use India If Pakistan Continues To Block Afghan War Supplies
Press Trust of India
March 30, 2012
‘US to rely on India if Pak doesn’t open NATO route’
Washington: The US will have to default and rely on India and the Northern Distribution network if Pakistan does not open up its crucial Afghan supply route, a top Pentagon official told lawmakers on Thursday.
However, the Pentagon official testifying before a Congressional subcommittee did not gave details of the Indian network, on which it can depend for its crucial supplies to Afghanistan.
“If we can’t negotiate or successfully negotiate the reopening of the PAK GLOC (Ground Lines of Communication) we have to default and rely on India and the Northern Distribution Network, our increased strat airlift,” Marine Corps Lieutenant General Frank Panter, the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics, told lawmakers.
Both are expensive propositions and it increases the deployment or redeployment, Panter said in his testimony before the Readiness Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.
Islamabad has closed the NATO supply route after the November 26 cross-border fire that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.
At the same time, the Pentagon official indicated that this (India) is a sensitive issue.
“There’s always that sensitive issue about the nations. We’re dealing with the Indian network in itself. If for some reason there’s additional political strain related to these countries, that restricts the flow as well. Redeployment timelines, by not being able to use the PAK GLOC, will increase along with, as you mentioned, ma’am, the cost as well,” he said.
“Despite all these challenges, though, TRANSCOM and CENTCOM, they do have mitigation strategies in place. I would be more than happy to talk about those as well. There are quite a few of them. But negotiations are ongoing, as you know, to reopen the PAK GLOC,” Panter said.
Army Lieutenant General Raymond Mason, Deputy Chief of Staff, Logistics, said the Pak GLOC is critical and it has been closed since November.
…
“The Northern Distribution Network, it’s three to four times more expensive because it’s three to four times lengthier. It’s very complicated, a variety of different methods – rail, ferries, truck – so significant amount of changing and loading and unloading, so that adds to the cost as well,” he added.
—————————————————————————-
Online International News Network
March 30, 2012
US Generals can’t change govt, army stance on NATO supply: Mukhtar
ISLAMABAD: Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmad Mukhtar Thursday urged that the visit of two or three US army men cannot change the stance of the government and Army regarding NATO supplies.
Talking to the media, the minister maintained that only parliament is sovereign in order to decide the restoration of NATO supply.
He said that talks regarding the opening of the NATO supply line are not being held while parliament would give its decision by reviewing the recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee on National Security and the government and army would follow the decision of the parliament.
Mukhtar said, therefore, the US should also respect the decision of the parliament. He added the recent visit of US army men cannot pressurize the government and army.
The national security and sovereignty of the country would be assured at any cost, while anyone who will go against the national security will have stern action taken against him, he added.
…
NATO Holds Talks To Expand Missile Shield Into Ukraine
Interfax-Ukraine
March 30, 2012
NATO sees prospects for cooperation with Ukraine
Cooperation between Ukraine and NATO in the anti-missile defense sphere has potential, NATO Liaison Office in Ukraine Marcin Koziel has said.
“There is potential for cooperation between Ukraine and NATO, in particular in the sphere of anti-missile defense,” he said at a roundtable discussion entitled “Transatlantic Safety, New Challenges and Architecture of Anti-Missile Defense, Priorities and Prospects for Central and Eastern Europe and Ukraine” in Kyiv on Friday.
…
Koziel said NATO is eager to cooperate with Ukraine.
In turn, representative of the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine Yuriy Fedkiv said that NATO is ready to “discuss with its partners the issues related to anti-missile defense and welcomes any proposals, including those from Ukraine, on the issue.”
Fedkiv added that regardless of Ukraine’s decision not to continue its way towards NATO membership, there is an annual program [Ukraine-NATO Action Plan], and this program “should become the basis for the cooperation that Ukraine is building with NATO.”
“We call on the government of Ukraine to use this tool for reform implementation in full,” he said.
—————————————————————————-
RT
March 30, 2012
NATO eyes deploying AMD in Ukraine
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is holding talks with Kiev over Ukraine’s possible participation in the alliance’s planned missile defense system n Europe.
According to the head of the NATO Liaison Office in Ukraine, Marchin Koziel, the deployment of the system’s elements is a priority for the alliance. He says during the summit in Lisbon, NATO heads agreed on the possibility of involving non-member countries – or “third countries”- in the planned missile shield in Europe.
Thanks to “its ballistics missiles, technologies, know-how, experience or simply the process of European integration,” Ukraine is such a country, he stated speaking at a round table meeting in Kiev, reports the Rosbalt news agency.
The alliance and the leadership of the former Soviet republic are holding informal consultations regarding the issue on both political and technical levels, Koziel said.
After the February meeting between NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryschenko, the latter announced Ukraine would participate in the upcoming alliance summit in Chicago.
NATO, for its part, noted that Kiev was interested in cooperation with the organization on the creation of the missile defense system.
Rasmussen also said that NATO will invite Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich to take part in the summit in May.
Ukraine had long been bidding to join the military alliance. However, after Yanukovich replaced his pro-Western predecessor Viktor Yushchenko, the country’s policy made a u-turn. The new leader signed a decree declaring that Ukraine would remain non-aligned to any political-military unions, but would still continue to cooperate with NATO and other blocks based upon common interests.
—————————————————————————-
National Radio Company of Ukraine
March 29, 2012
Ukraine interested in further developing of strategic partnership with USA
This is what Secretary of the National Defense and Security Council of Ukraine (NSDC) Andriy Kliuyev said at a meeting with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine John Tefft today in Kyiv.
The sides also discussed a number of issues of bilateral cooperation, including in the areas of international security, investment, trade and energy. Andriy Kliuyev informed the American diplomat about the new role of National Security and Defense of Ukraine.
Stop NATO news: March 30, 2012
====
Australia: U.S. Can Station Aircraft Carriers, Nuclear Attack Submarines, Drones
Australia: NATO’s Main Military Partner In Asia-Pacific
Philippines Offers U.S. Wider Military Access, Seeks Weapons
Georgia Deploys Paramilitary Formations On Abkhaz Border: Russia
Armenia: NATO’s Third Outpost In The Caucasus
Cambodia: U.S. Completes Fourth Annual Military Exercise
Thailand: U.S. Ends Largest-Ever Annual Air Exercise
Pentagon Installs Comprehensive New Radar System In “Arabian” Gulf
NATO Trains Finnish, Swedish Warplane Crews For Baltic Operations
U.S. Sells Morocco 60 Howitzers, Trains Army In Their Use
====
Australia: U.S. Can Station Aircraft Carriers, Nuclear Attack Submarines, Drones
http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=168512
Agence France-Presse
March 29, 2012
US-Australia military co-operation stepped up in Asia-Pacific
Martin parry
Australia said yesterday it may allow the US to use its territory to operate long-range spy drones, as part of an increased US presence in the Asia-Pacific region that has rankled with China.
Washington and Canberra could also reportedly station US aircraft carriers and nuclear-powered attack submarines in the Western Australian city of Perth, as part of a major expansion of military ties.
Under the expansion, the first US Marines out of a 2500-strong deployment to Darwin in northern Australia — unveiled last November by President Barack Obama — are to arrive next month. The Marines plan has irked Beijing, but reassured some Asian countries who see it as a statement that Washington intends to stand up for its allies and interests in the region amid concerns about China’s assertiveness.
The Washington Post wrote that the US was considering using the Cocos Islands, atolls in the Indian Ocean off northwest Australia, to launch unmanned surveillance aircraft. The Cocos would replace the US Indian Ocean base of Diego Garcia, which America leases from Britain and which is to be mothballed in 2016.
The Washington Post said Australia’s government was considering upgrading Perth’s Stirling naval base “for deployments and operations in Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean by the US Navy”. The upgrade would reportedly help Stirling service large surface warships including US aircraft carriers, and attack submarines.
Australian Defence Minister Stephen Smith said the priorities in closer co-operation were the rotation of Marines through Darwin, greater air access and more use of the Stirling base.
====
Australia: NATO’s Main Military Partner In Asia-Pacific
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/SID-1A5643D9-9F432434/natolive/news_85591.htm
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
March 29, 2012
Australia, a Key Partner in NATO’s security mission
‘You are a highly appreciated partner and contributor’: these were the words of welcome and appreciation that the NATO Secretary General expressed to the group of visiting Australian parliamentarians at NATO Headquarters today. ‘In today’s world where the defence of our borders may take us far away, we realize that we cannot accomplish our security mission without our Partners around the Globe’, Mr. Rasmussen said. ‘In this respect, operations in Afghanistan and Australia’s considerable contribution to the International Security Assistance Force Afghanistan (ISAF) since 2006 are a ‘clear testimony of it” he added.
Australia is the largest non-NATO troop contributor in Afghanistan with 1,550 soldiers mainly deployed in Uruzgan province, a long contested area. Afghanistan, but also the forthcoming Chicago Summit, smart defence and NATO-Russia’s relations were amongst the issues of discussion between the parliamentarians and the Secretary General.
The Australian delegation included senators and members of the House of Representatives, representing both the governing Labor Party and opposition Liberal Party of Australia. Hon. Joel Fitzgibbon, MP, Australian Labour Party; Mr. Michael Danby, MP, Australian Labour Party; Senator Anne McEwen, Australian Labour Party, Ms. Nola Marino, MP, Liberal Party of Australia; Mr. Alex Hawke, MP, Liberal Party of Australia and Senator Gary Humphries, Liberal Party of Australia are key legislators interested in different aspects of defence and security in their home country.
The visit provided the participants with the opportunity of discussing the most important security issues of common interest with NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen and other high level NATO officials and experts, as well as from NATO’s highest military headquarters, Allied Command Operations. In addition to Afghanistan, discussions addressed the issues of emerging global security challenges, and the Alliance’s active engagement in a more efficient and flexible partnership…
NATO’s relations with Australia have fast developed during the past years, resulting in a structured, friendly and operational relationship. An important milestone in NATO-Australia relations was reached when – during his official visit to NATO in January 2012 -, Mr. Kevin Rudd, the then Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs accredited Ambassador Dr. Brendan Nelson as Australia’s representative to NATO.
====
Philippines Offers U.S. Wider Military Access, Seeks Weapons
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=20123\30\story_30-3-2012_pg4_3
Reuters
March 29, 2012
Manila offers US wider military access, seeks weapons
MANILA: The Philippines is offering the United States greater access to its airfields and may open new areas for soldiers to use, as the Pacific country seeks stronger military ties with its closest ally, moves likely to further raise tensions with China.
In exchange for opening its bases, the Philippines will ask Washington for more military equipment and training, including another Hamilton-class warship and possibly a squadron of old F-16 jet fighters, Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario told Reuters on Thursday. “As part of building up our minimum credible defence posture, we would like the Americans to come more often,” del Rosario said in an interview at his office near Manila Bay.
Manila favours more frequent joint military drills, he said. One such exercise, which will be staged on western island Palawan for the first time, is scheduled for April 16. “Let’s have these joint training exercises more frequently and on a bigger scale. As many times as we can, in different places if we can, that’s the objective of the exercise,” del Rosario said, the first official confirmation of talks between the countries on increasing the US military presence in the Philippines.
…
Del Rosario said the possible purchase of F-16s and the request for a third cutter for the coast guard would be among issues up for discussion at a meeting between the two sides on April 30 in Washington. The US is also looking into gaining access, under a “joint use” arrangement, to around half a dozen civilian airfields in the Philippines, where US transports, fighters and spy planes can land for repairs, refuelling and temporary deployment.
The talks, between among foreign and defence leaders, will precede a meeting between US President Barack Obama and Philippine President Benigno Aquino later this year. In the last 10 years, the Philippines has received about 22 billion pesos ($512.22 million) in US military aid, Del Rosario said.
====
Georgia Deploys Paramilitary Formations On Abkhaz Border: Russia
http://en.trend.az/regions/world/russia/2008380.html
Trend News Agency
March 29, 2012
Russian Foreign Ministry: Georgia creates informal armed groups on border with Abkhazia
Georgia is creating informal armed groups in the border regions with Abkhazia, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin told RIA Novosti following the nineteenth round of international discussions on security and stability in the South Caucasus, which was held in Geneva on Thursday.
“Since January, seven people were killed. There were some armed groups. This is confirmed by Georgian opposition politicians. The Georgian side in response to our statements traditionally tried to shift all the responsibility on to the Abkhaz side and provocations from the Russian side. But it sounded very unfounded and we with facts and figures showed that we control the situation, we know the specific places where that happens,” he said.
…
====
Armenia: NATO’s Third Outpost In The Caucasus
http://www.armradio.am/eng/news/?part=off&id=22412
Public Radio of Armenia
March 29, 2012
NATO pledges support for further defense reforms in Armenia
The annual meeting in Political and Partnerships Committee (PPC) + Armenia format was held at NATO headquarters on March 29.
The Armenian delegation, headed by First Deputy Defense Minister David Tonoyan, and representatives of NATO member and partner countries discussed the implementation of defense reforms in Armenia and the amendment of defense legislature.
The parties noted the considerable progress towards adoption of the new code of conduct of the Armed Forces, development of a new military education doctrine and the capacities of the peacekeeping forces.
The Alliance expressed readiness to continue to support the implementation of reforms in the fields of defense and security.
====
Cambodia: U.S. Completes Fourth Annual Military Exercise
http://english.cri.cn/6966/2012/03/24/3124s688906.htm
Xinhua News Agency
March 24, 2012
U.S., Cambodian Military Drill Ends Successfully
The 12-day joint U. S., Cambodian military exercise Angkor Sentinel 2012 ended successfully on Friday.
The closing ceremony was held at the Training School for Multi- national Peacekeeping Forces in Kampong Speu province, about 48 kilometers west of Phnom Penh, under the presidency of the four- star general Chay Sang Yun, a secretary of state for the Cambodian Defense Ministry, and Jeff Daigle, Charge d’Affairs of the U.S. Embassy to Cambodia.
“The drill was a very good opportunity for Cambodian and U.S. military personnel to create closer friendship relations and to build better military ties between the two countries,” said Chay Sang Yun, adding that about 450 Cambodian armed forces joined the drill.
…
According to a press release from the U.S. Embassy in Phnom Penh, the drill began from March 13 to 22 in Kampot and Kampong Speu provinces to cement the two countries’ military ties.
It said approximately 100 members of U.S. Army Pacific joined Cambodian armed forces in focusing on peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance operations, including a battalion exercise, a counter improvised explosives devices field exercise, medical civic actions projects to treat underserved rural inhabitants, and battlefield medical activities.
Angkor Sentinel is an annual, bilateral exercise sponsored by U. S. Army Pacific and hosted by the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces, it said. This exercise marks the third anniversary of this…military exercise.
====
Thailand: U.S. Ends Largest-Ever Annual Air Exercise
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123296009
U.S. Air Force
March 29, 2012
U.S., Thai service members conclude Cope Tiger
By Capt. David Herndon
Cope Tiger Public Affairs
-This year more than 1,900 airmen and civilians participated in the exercise, including approximately 430 U.S. service members. The exercise included a total of 92 aircraft and 34 air defense units, including U.S. platforms such as the C-130 Hercules, A-10 Thunderbolt II, C-17 Globemaster III and F-15 Eagle. Combined exercise leaders said this was the largest Cope Tiger bi-lateral freedom jump in its 18-year history.
UDON THANI, Thailand: More than 240 Thai and U.S. airmen and soldiers took part in a personnel drop over Lop Buri, Thailand, to close out this year’s Cope Tiger 2012 multilateral air exercise, which was held here March 12-23.
The mission between the U.S., Thailand and Singapore aimed to improve U.S. and Royal Thai Air Force abilities to inter-operate.
…
The jump personnel were transported by two U.S. Air Force C-17 aircrews from Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, and Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, and by two C-130 Hercules aircrews from Yokota Air Base, Japan.
…
The mobility Airmen were staged out of Udon Thani Royal Thai Air Base Base, Thailand, and readied the transport aircraft for static line and high-altitude/low-opening procedures…
This year more than 1,900 airmen and civilians participated in the exercise, including approximately 430 U.S. service members. The exercise included a total of 92 aircraft and 34 air defense units, including U.S. platforms such as the C-130 Hercules, A-10 Thunderbolt II, C-17 Globemaster III and F-15 Eagle. Combined exercise leaders said this was the largest Cope Tiger bi-lateral freedom jump in its 18-year history.
“This was the ultimate training environment to practice the execution of a complex scenario with multiple weapon systems, users and methods of aerial delivery,” said Monaco.
Cope Tiger is an annual, multilateral joint and combined field training exercise that takes place at Korat and Udon Thani Royal Thai Air Force Bases. The exercise aims to enhance readiness and combined/joint interoperability between U.S. forces, allies and partners within the Asia-Pacific region. Exercise scenarios concluded March 23 and redeployment of personnel and aircraft continue this week.
====
Pentagon Installs Comprehensive New Radar System In “Arabian” Gulf
http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123295822
U.S. Air Force
March 28, 2012
New radar helps Airmen defend Arabian Gulf
By Tech. Sgt. Benjamin Grewe
727th Expeditionary Air Control Squadron
SOUTHWEST ASIA: Airmen defending the Arabian Gulf have another arrow in their quiver thanks to a new radar system installed at the 380th Air Expeditionary Wing here March 18.
The TPS-75, or “Tipsy-75″ as the 727th Expeditionary Air Control Squadron calls it, is a powerful air surveillance radar capable of providing long-range, real-time radar coverage.
Airmen assigned to the 727th EACS use the TPS-75 to provide 24-hour air defense and surveillance for unknown threats over the entire Arabian Gulf region. The new system gives the radar operators both a bigger and more detailed picture as they monitor all aerial activity in the area.
“Our job is to constantly watch the skies,” said Lt. Col. Steven A. Breitfelder, the 727th EACS commander. “Our operators defend the Arabian Gulf and its surrounding countries by monitoring the area for enemy aircraft.”
The 727th EACS set a goal for increased radar coverage to improve their current mission capabilities. Airmen began looking and coordinating with the host nation in January to find a suitable site able to support the TPS-75.
…
====
NATO Trains Finnish, Swedish Warplane Crews For Baltic Operations
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Allied Command Operations
March 29, 2012
NATO AND PARTNER AIR FORCES FINISH TRAINING FOR SAFETY IN BALTIC AIRSPACE
Šiauliai: The eleventh sequel of the Baltic Region Training Event (BRTE XI) was completed on 28 March when all assets involved in the event were safely back at their home bases. The two-day training event brought together German Phantom fighter aircraft and Swedish Gripen as well as Finnish Hornet jets in the Baltic region to execute a scenario where a Lithuanian Spartan transport aircraft simulated a loss of communication above international waters in the Baltic Sea.
“This has been another excellent occasion to train important procedures for NATO’s Air Policing in the Baltic region,” sums up Lieutenant Colonel Holger Radmann, commander of the German F-4F Phantom detachment tasked with executing this NATO mission at Šiauliai air base, Lithuania. “The participation of the Partnership for Peace (PfP) members Sweden and Finland was another realistic facet that allowed us to train handover procedures across national borders.”
…
For the representative of the Lithuanian host nation, Colonel Antanas Jucius, it has been a pleasure to host BRTE XI at Siauliai.
…
Colonel Jucius underlined the joint effort during the BRTE, where Germany provided the fighter aircraft, the Baltic countries ensured command and control and the Partner nations helped to bring back safely the aircraft that simulated the loss of communication. “We must train to be proficient in these procedures.”
====
U.S. Sells Morocco 60 Howitzers, Trains Army In Their Use
http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=7733&lang=0
U.S. Africa Command
March 26, 2012
U.S. Soldiers Observe Training at Moroccan Field Artillery Center
By Sergeant Terysa M. King
U.S. Army Africa Public Affairs
MOROCCO: In order to help improve the security of Morocco, 20 members of the 15th Royal Artillery Group purchased approximately 60 armored vehicles called M109A5 howitzers through the U.S. Foreign Military Sales program.
At the request of the Royal Moroccan Field Artillery Training Center, an artillery tactics military-to-military exercise was executed in the cities of Fes and Guercie, March 4-10, 2012 to help provide the Moroccan soldiers with training on the maintenance, safety and firing of the M109A5 system.
…
The M109A5 howitzer is an armored vehicle that is easily customized for specific mission requirements. It is the most common support weapon of maneuver brigades of armored and mechanized infantry divisions.
====
Afghanistan: The West’s Lost War
The News
March 30, 2011
The lost war
Ayaz Wazir*
====
We recently saw a horrifying example of the consistently bestial behaviour of American troops when 17 civilians, including women and children asleep in different houses, were woken up and butchered. There have been innumerable incidents of brutal killings of innocent civilians in the past as well but they were invariably swept under the carpet, after some inane US expression of regret, with the collusion of the government in Kabul which appeased relatives of the dead by sending them for Hajj, allocating houses in a posh area in Kandahar, or financial compensations.
A decade is a long-enough period of firing on mosques, wedding parties and funeral processions and riding roughshod over not just the bodies of innocent Afghans but also Afghan values and sensibilities.
====
Winning the war in Afghanistan was never an easy proposition. After the Americans’ decade-long stay in that country, discovery of a way out which is acceptable to the US is almost an impossibility. Nevertheless, the US seems bent upon proving all the negative indicators wrong.
The declared objective at the time of invasion of Afghanistan was the overthrow of the Taliban and destruction of Al-Qaeda. Bringing democracy was not part of the stated policy, nor was development despite the long stay ahead.
The real cause for this long-drawn-out war seems to be something other than the stated objectives. If that were not the case, US troops could have been withdrawn immediately after the Taliban’s removal from authority and Al-Qaeda’s defeat. On the contrary, the US is engaged in a war whose end is not within sight and the course uncertain. Many believe it in reality to be what President Bush once said, which was later covered up as a slip of the tongue—i.e., a “crusade.” Or, reportedly, as a “clash of civilizations, a clash of religions and a clash of the whole way of life.” Indications from across our western border certainly point in that direction.
While the Taliban have been dislodged from government they certainly are not defeated. Their resilience in fighting the war, and that too against the world’s sole superpower and its allies, has been tremendously effective and has worn out the occupying forces. In turn, in their frustration these forces have resorted to brutalities which can indisputably be called war crimes.
We recently saw a horrifying example of the consistently bestial behaviour of American troops when 17 civilians, including women and children asleep in different houses, were woken up and butchered. There have been innumerable incidents of brutal killings of innocent civilians in the past as well but they were invariably swept under the carpet, after some inane US expression of regret, with the collusion of the government in Kabul which appeased relatives of the dead by sending them for Hajj, allocating houses in a posh area in Kandahar, or financial compensations.
Such actions expose them thoroughly, bringing to the fore their hatred for Islam and the cultural values of the Afghans. Cutting off fingers of dead Taliban as trophies, urinating on corpses and killing innocent people in night raids in their homes are just a few incidents in a long list of atrocities committed by them. But the abhorrent incident at Bagram airbase when US soldiers burnt copies of the Holy Quran inflamed passions. The violent reaction that followed was but natural. Every Muslim worth the name would have reacted that way, to say nothing of the Afghans who have always upheld Islamic values above everything else. It also led to a security cleared Afghan worker, not a Taliban, losing control of himself and killing two American advisors in the ministry of interior whom he was supposed to protect. It was only after learning the lesson the hard way that the US made it mandatory for troops to undergo a short course to familiarise themselves with
the religious and cultural values of the Afghans.
Anti-American feelings over the burning of the Quran had barely cooled when the Kandahar killing of the 17 took place. This butchery has infuriated Afghans so much that they react against foreign troops whenever and wherever they can. The attack by a young Afghan interpreter at an airport in Helmand province last week is a case in point. He tried to run over and kill a top US commander, Maj Gen Mark Gurganus, with his vehicle last week. The general, along with his British deputy and other senior military officers, was at the air strip to greet visiting US secretary of defence, Leon Panetta. The Afghan, it is believed, was not aware of the expected arrival of Panetta. He would have caused a disaster had he crashed his speeding vehicle a few minutes later into the path of Panetta’s landing aircraft.
Such incidents, on the one hand, fuel concern about a surge in attacks on foreign troops and on the other lend support to the resistance of the Taliban whose movement has now turned into a national war for every Afghan, whether he admits that or not.
A decade is a long-enough period of firing on mosques, wedding parties and funeral processions and riding roughshod over not just the bodies of innocent Afghans but also Afghan values and sensibilities. During this period the Americans should have learnt to respect the religious and cultural values of their Afghan allies if they were really serious about winning their hearts and minds.
Another important lesson they should have learnt long ago but do not want to is to find a workable, durable and permanent solution to the problems in Afghanistan. They should have entered into serious negotiations with all the stakeholders by now, but the situation that exists is to the contrary. The Taliban have called off the dialogue process for which they had opened an office in Doha, Qatar. With Iran they are not on talking terms and with Pakistan their relations are at the lowest ebb. It is another matter that the government wants to restore them to the previous level, at least, by setting new rules of engagement with the US, while sheltering behind parliamentary action to this end.
In short, the war in Afghanistan has been lost and so is the case with their stay after 2014 in that country. The patience of the Afghan people is worn out and their anger mounting high. It will only be prudent for the US to give up on the military pursuit of resolving the problem there. It should concentrate on finding a political solution before it becomes a distant reality and they are forced to leave in haste and abandon Afghanistan like other great powers before them.
*The writer is a former ambassador.
BRICS: No Foreign Intervention In Syria, No War Against Iran
Voice of Russia
March 29, 2012
BRICS countries on Syria crisis
Polina Chernitsa
Russia has urged the BRICS Group of counties to render humanitarian assistance to Syria. A statement to this effect was made by President Dmitry Medvedev following the BRICS summit in New Delhi. All BRICS countries deem foreign interference in Syria as unacceptable.
The Syrian crisis topped the agenda of the BRICS summit. President Medvedev described the position of the BRICS countries on Syria as constructive and coordinated. Russia, India, China, Brazil and South Africa stand for further dialogue between parties to the Syrian conflict without intervention from outside, Medevedev said.
“The principles of normalization for Syria have all been made clear ever since Kofi Annan’s mission got down to work. There can be no foreign intervention in Syria. The Syrian government, on the one hand, and the opposition forces, on the other, should engage in dialogue. The government and the opposition in Syria should believe in dialogue rather than follow a short-sighted approach by saying that dialogue is doomed and that only military operations can restore order in the country. Russia will exert efforts to secure the success of the dialogue. The BRICS countries have swapped opinion on this issue and Russia has called on them to render humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people. Russia has already been providing Syria with relief supplies.”
President Medvedev said that the participants in the summit exchanged opinion on the situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear program and looked into the possibility of giving membership in the UN Security Council to India, Brazil, and South Africa. Medvedev said that Russia saw these countries as “strong candidates” and was ready to support them.
—————————————————————————-
Itar-Tass
March 29, 2012
BRICS states warn about terrible consequences of conflict in Iran
NEW DELHI: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa warn about the catastrophic aftermath if the situation around Iran escalates into a conflict.
In their declaration, the BRICS group of emerging market nations warned that if the situation grows into a conflict it will be in nobody’s interests.
BRICS leaders believe that Iran plays a key role in the peaceful development and prosperity of the region, which is very important politically and economically.
The BRICS leaders admitted their concern about the situation that develops around Iran’s nuclear program. They stressed that they recognize the right of Iran to peaceful uses of nuclear energy in line with its international commitments and UN Security Council resolutions, and favor the settlement of problems connected with that politically and diplomatically, as well as through a dialogue of the interested parties, including a dialogue between the IAEA and Iran.
—————————————————————————-
Interfax
March 29, 2012
Iran situation must not be allowed to turn into a conflict – BRICS leaders
DELHI: The situation around Iran must not be allowed to turn into a conflict, the leaders of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) said in a declaration.
This situation must be stopped from growing into a conflict, the catastrophic consequences of which will not meet anyone’s interests, they said.
Iran is bound to play a key role in promoting the peaceful development and prosperity of the region, which is increasingly important both politically and economically, the BRICS leaders said, expressing hope that Iran would play this role as a responsible member of the international community.
They also expressed concern over the situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear issue.
The BRICS states recognize Iran’s right to use civilian nuclear technology in accordance with its international obligations and want all of these problems to be resolved by political and diplomatic methods through dialogue involving all of the sides, among them the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran, in compliance with the UN Security Council’s appropriate resolutions, the declaration says.
—————————————————————————-
Itar-Tass
March 29, 2012
BRICS should be one of key elements of global management system
NEW DELHI: Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said BRICS could be one of the key elements of the global management system.
“In the future our organisation can be one of the key elements of the global management system. Russia believes that BRICS should present itself as a new model of relations that are built without any stereotypes and constructions of ‘a bridge’ and a ‘mediator’,” Medvedev said at an expanded meeting on Thursday.
In his words, such approach towards uniting the states with the population of about three billion people will restrict its possibilities to pursue an independent and coordinating policy on the international arena.
—————————————————————————-
Xinhua News Agency
March 29, 2012
BRICS countries say Western countries’ monetary policy hurting emerging economies
NEW DELHI: The BRICS countries Thursday expressed concerns over the monetary policy pursued by the Western countries, saying it has been hurting the emerging economies of the world.
According to a draft declaration by the BRICS, aggressive monetary easing by Western central banks to revive growth in their economies is hurting emerging nations which are facing a rush of destabilizing capital inflows.
“Excessive liquidity because of the central bank actions has been spilling over into emerging economies, fostering excessive volatility in capital flows and commodity prices,” according to the document.
It also says that the BRICS group wants steps to avoid escalation of the Iran oil crisis and favored a diplomatic resolution to the problem.
Leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, the BRICS nations, are attending a one-day summit in the Indian capital.
—————————————————————————-
RT
March 29, 2012
BRICS agree to local currency credits to ease dollar dependency
The BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – have agreed to provide credit to each other in local currencies. Officials say the deal will facilitate economic growth in times of crisis.
The currency swap deal is aimed at promoting trade and investment in local currencies as well as to cut transaction costs. It’s also seen as a step to replace the dollar as a reserve currency in trade between BRICS.
“The idea is in line with many interests and economic exigencies in the world economy,” Yaroslav Lissovolik, the chief economist at Deutsche Bank told RT. “The euro and dollar are no longer seen as unquestionable monopolies in the role of reserve currencies. Clearly the world needs more reserve currencies.”
The deal would also increase the BRICS influence on the international arena and will make their cooperation less sensitive to sanctions from the West, experts say.
“The BRICS countries are in the first rank to do the job that international financial system now needs. What the BRICS said was a very welcomed wake up call,” John Kirton, the Co-Director of the BRICS Reasearch Group told RT.
Russia and China have been trading in the rouble and yuan for several years, now Russia plans to expand local currency settlement with India.
“With China it took us three years to (evolve) from initial conversations to trading in local currencies,” Vladimir Dmitriev, the chairman of Russia’ s VEB told reporters. “I think we will meet similar terms with India”.
Meanwhile the swap requires a lot of technical work by each country such as the synchronization of national banking legislation, according to Mr. Dmitriev.
The BRICS countries are also going to announce plans on a joint development bank which is considered a possible rival to the World Bank and the IMF. If established, it would function as a lending agency and would provide finance for joint BRICS projects.
“They made it very clear it would be built to benefit not only BRICS countries themselves, but developing countries more broadly,” said Kirton.
“But the big message was to give the World Bank more resources, only then would they see how the BRICS bank would fit in the supplement what they’ve already got.”
—————————————————————————-
Xinhua News Agency
March 29, 2012
Chinese, Russian presidents vow to lift bilateral ties to new level
NEW DELHI: Chinese President Hu Jintao and his Russian counterpart Dmitri Medvedev discussed bilateral ties and other issues of common concern here on Wednesday, agreeing to promote China-Russia relations to a new level.
During their meeting on the sidelines of the fourth BRICS Summit, which groups China, Brazile, India, Russia and South Africa, the two leaders agreed to make joint efforts to lift their all-round strategic cooperation partnership to a new level.
Hu said the two countries last year charted the course and set the goal for the development of the bilateral relationship in the next decade and developed a plan for cooperation in various fields.
The move had given fresh impetus to the development of the comprehensive strategic partnership between the two countries, Hu said.
Hu expressed hope that, in the current complex and ever-changing international situation, China and Russia could take a more active stance to implement major consensus on bilateral cooperation, maintain close high-level contacts and bolster political support for each other.
Meanwhile, efforts should be made to secure the smooth operation of various cooperation mechanisms to further advance collaboration on major projects covering such fields as trade, the economy, energy, aerospace, high-technology and culture, Hu said.
He said the two sides should jointly ensure the success of the Year of Tourism in each country and expand exchanges between their young people.
Medvedev said frequent high-level contacts and prompt exchange of views on bilateral ties and other major issues were of high importance in ensuring bilateral relations stayed on the right track.
He said Russia was ready to maintain regular exchanges of high-level visits and close communication.
Last year, two-way trade between the two countries hit a record high, he said, adding that energy cooperation on major oil and nuclear energy projects progressed smoothly.
Medvedev said Moscow was confident of meeting the goal of achieving 100 billion U.S. dollars in bilateral trade per year by 2015 and 200 billion dollars by 2020.
