Pompeo says NATO must change, or risk becoming obsolete

[rooster59]

Pompeo says NATO must change, or risk becoming obsolete

By Paul Carrel

 

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks at an event commemorating the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall in Berlin, Germany November 8, 2019. REUTERS/Hannibal Hanschke

 

BERLIN (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Friday NATO must grow and change or risk becoming obsolete, a day after French President Emmanuel Macron said the alliance was dying.

 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has rejected Macron's comments, in an interview with British weekly The Economist, as "drastic" and Pompeo said on Thursday the alliance was perhaps one of the most important "in all recorded history".

 

But he acknowledged the need for NATO to evolve in a question-and-answer session after delivering a speech in Berlin on Friday, one day before the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

 

"Seventy years on ... it (NATO) needs to grow and change," he replied. "It needs to confront the realities of today and the challenges of today."

 

"If nations believe that they can get the security benefit without providing NATO the resources that it needs, if they don't live up to their commitments, there is a risk that NATO could become ineffective or obsolete," he said.

 

NATO was founded in 1949 to provide collective security against the Soviet Union and is preparing for a summit in London on Dec. 4.

 

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg wants to project an image of unity when Chinese military might is growing and Russia is accused of trying to undermine Western democracies through cyber attacks, disinformation campaigns and covert operations.

 

CRITICISM OF CHINA, RUSSIA, IRAN

 

In his speech, Pompeo criticised Russia's treatment of political foes and said China used methods against its people that would be "horrifyingly familiar to former East Germans."

 

Reflecting on the lessons learnt from the Wall coming down, he said "the West - all of us - lost our way in the afterglow of that proud moment."

 

"We thought we could divert our resources away from alliances, and our militaries. We were wrong," he said. "Today, Russia – led by a former KGB officer once stationed in Dresden ‒ invades its neighbours and slays political opponents."

 

Europe's energy supplies should not depend on Russian President Vladimir Putin, he said.

 

Pompeo said it would be irrational to consider Russia a "worthy partner" in the Middle East though Washington wanted other countries' help put pressure on Iran to resume negotiations over its nuclear programme and to "cut off its ability to fund terrorist proxies".

 

Pompeo said the Chinese Communist Party was "shaping a new vision of authoritarianism" and warned Germany about using Chinese telecom equipment vendor Huawei Technologies <HWT.UL> to build its fifth-generation data network (5G).

 

In Beijing, China's Foreign Ministry criticised Pompeo over earlier comments about the Chinese Communist Party, saying those remarks had been "extremely dangerous" and exposed his "sinister intentions".

 

(Editing by Thomas Escritt and Timothy Heritage)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-11-09

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Somtamnication]

Lost all trust in this guy. I hope he becomes obsolete.

[leeneeds]

Reality setting in, being complacent while the Chinese build and disregard borders, the Russians just invade, toothless tiger NATO  has become,  no push back, verbal protests are just ignored, the western alliance has become soft and the advantages continue to be taken.

[Samui Bodoh]

Sorry Mike, too little, too late. It doesn't matter what you say anymore and you are not going to get your Senate seat as you tied your future to Trump, and everything Trump touches dies.

 

"...Pompeo said on Thursday the alliance was perhaps one of the most important "in all recorded history"..."

 

There is a great deal of truth to this statement, but the President that you aligned yourself with has gone to great lengths to undermine the alliance, to the point where many wonder if the words/promises/commitments of the US are still valid.

 

"...NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg wants to project an image of unity when Chinese military might is growing and Russia is accused of trying to undermine Western democracies through cyber attacks, disinformation campaigns and covert operations..."

 

These are some of the identifiable threats and there are certainly more out there. However, if the largest, most powerful member of the alliance sits, whines, cries and sulks, little will get done to meet them.

 

"...Pompeo said it would be irrational to consider Russia a "worthy partner" in the Middle East..."

 

True, it would be irrational to simply leave the Middle East to the Russians, but that is what your country has just done. Or, didn't you notice?

 

The simple facts are that the NATO alliance has been a tremendous force for peace for 70+ years. If one looks at human history, we are overdue for another explosion of global stupidity, and in my opinion the main reason that has not occurred is NATO. There is a saying that an alliance is only as strong as its weakest member, but there is also truth in the saying that an alliance is only as strong as its strongest member. The damage done by Trump to global security is immense, but nowhere greater than the harm done to NATO.

 

I have said it before and (sadly) need to say it again;

 

Donald Trump is an ever-expanding cloud of toxic waste that defiles everything it touches.

 

Let this nightmare end quickly.

 

 

[Tug]

Take heart Samui when we get rid of trump we will come roaring back and pompeo is in deep he’s toast

[jingjai9]

Sounds like Pompeo, Russia and China are merely pushing the update button on the cold war - new names, icons, etc. while the us and them dichotomy lives on, polictical reincarnation.

[steve187]

 

i think some countries need to pay more, esp some of the micky mouse countries, that are in it without paying much

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

17 minutes ago, steve187 said:

 

i think some countries need to pay more, esp some of the micky mouse countries, that are in it without paying much

 

 

 

Your unattributed table presents information that is irrelevant to the issue of nation’s spending to support NATO.

 

The total annual NATO budget from

all nations is around $1.4 Billion.

 

The numbers in your chart refer to total national defense spending, the US spends vast amounts on defense, but then has its military forces deployed globally and much of the spending is subsidies to the US defense industries.

 

Yes the US would like NATO members to spend more supporting NATO but more realistically the US would like NATO nations (and any nation looking for a trade deal) to commit to buying more military equipment and services from US defense industries. 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-nato-budget-is-funded-2018-7

[racket]

5 hours ago, rooster59 said:

NATO was founded in 1949 to provide collective security against the Soviet Union and is preparing for a summit in London on Dec. 4.

 

..and the name itself contradicts to what it has become. It was only supposed to be a North Atlantic alliance; however stupid policies by previous administrations have pushed memberships far to the east angering Russia. NATO needs to get rid of the eastern bloc in order to survive and member states should put a cap on 3% to GDP to military spending, otherwise kick them out of the block. U.S intelligence services personnel and forces should also have full access to respective countries military bases and naval facilities, this is something I hope Donald Trump will push forward. Macron's speech is timed perfectly because his country can't afford additional military spending, what a jerk.

[racket]

28 minutes ago, steve187 said:

 

i think some countries need to pay more, esp some of the micky mouse countries, that are in it without paying much

 

 

 

You are right, but don't get fooled because most the numbers are fake to begin with. The reality is that the majority of these countries allocate 40-70% from their military spending to R&D, which is practically not military or defense spending. Most of these countries spend below 1% on military to GDP. Greece, Turkey Poland and UK are probably the only ones that are honest about their fair share.

[Becker]

15 minutes ago, racket said:

You are right, but don't get fooled because most the numbers are fake to begin with. The reality is that the majority of these countries allocate 40-70% from their military spending to R&D, which is practically not military or defense spending. Most of these countries spend below 1% on military to GDP. Greece, Turkey Poland and UK are probably the only ones that are honest about their fair share.

And here you go with your unsupported claim again. You have been asked to supply links to credible sources that support your claim but so far a big, fat nothing so I will consider you a troll until you do.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, racket said:

 

..and the name itself contradicts to what it has become. It was only supposed to be a North Atlantic alliance; however stupid policies by previous administrations have pushed memberships far to the east angering Russia. NATO needs to get rid of the eastern bloc in order to survive and member states should put a cap on 3% to GDP to military spending, otherwise kick them out of the block. U.S intelligence services personnel and forces should also have full access to respective countries military bases and naval facilities, this is something I hope Donald Trump will push forward. Macron's speech is timed perfectly because his country can't afford additional military spending, what a jerk.

The US can go swivel with any request for US intelligence personnel/services being given full access to NATO member bases.

 

certainly while Trump leaks foreign nation’s intelligence to the Russians.

[Salerno]

35 minutes ago, racket said:

U.S intelligence services personnel and forces should also have full access to respective countries military bases and naval facilities, this is something I hope Donald Trump will push forward.

No worries, as soon as the US opens theirs up. 

 

One of the most ridiculous statements I've seen on here and that's saying something.

[neeray]

6 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

Lost all trust in this guy. I hope he becomes obsolete.

Very few things are for sure with the Trump administration but one thing that is for certain is "the revolving door". The day will come for Pompeo. The door will continue to revolve.

[spidermike007]

A more accurate statement would have been for Pompeo to say both myself, and my political master must change. We are both ignorant of world affairs and diplomacy. And we have been terrible for the alliance, and have treated our allies with no respect whatsoever.

 

Pompeo lecturing NATO? You have got to be kidding. This guy is the very epitome of an empty suit.

[Mavideol]

7 hours ago, Somtamnication said:

Lost all trust in this guy. I hope he becomes obsolete.

and that makes 2 of us....obsolete thrown into garbage bin

[Opl]

2 hours ago, racket said:

You are right, but don't get fooled because most the numbers are fake to begin with. The reality is that the majority of these countries allocate 40-70% from their military spending to R&D, which is practically not military or defense spending. Most of these countries spend below 1% on military to GDP. Greece, Turkey Poland and UK are probably the only ones that are honest about their fair share.

To compare the USA to Albania is already highly questionable, to begin with.

France is engaged in external military operations in Sahel but also since 2015 terror attacks to the protection of its citizens in its very soil. For some countries, the main threat comes from Russia ( and are begging for US military bases), for others the threat comes from Africa.etc, etc,  

NATO was unable to move to protect the Kurds, Erdogan and Trump made it clear. Erdogan is buying russian, therefore NATO is useless. Macron is right.  

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Your unattributed table presents information that is irrelevant to the issue of nation’s spending to support NATO.

 

The total annual NATO budget from

all nations is around $1.4 Billion.

 

The numbers in your chart refer to total national defense spending, the US spends vast amounts on defense, but then has its military forces deployed globally and much of the spending is subsidies to the US defense industries.

 

Yes the US would like NATO members to spend more supporting NATO but more realistically the US would like NATO nations (and any nation looking for a trade deal) to commit to buying more military equipment and services from US defense industries. 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-nato-budget-is-funded-2018-7

 

There is a commitment by ALL member countries to spend a % of their GDP. I believe that agreed figure is 2%.

 

Your country is joint worst, not even 50% of the target!

 

Seems like your happy to let others pay for the defense of your country whilst still criticizing them for doing so!

 

Let's see how you do on your own.

[Longcut]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The US can go swivel with any request for US intelligence personnel/services being given full access to NATO member bases.

 

certainly while Trump leaks foreign nation’s intelligence to the Russians.

I suppose you can back up that accusation? What proof do you have of such a statement?

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

There is a commitment by ALL member countries to spend a % of their GDP. I believe that agreed figure is 2%.

 

Your country is joint worst, not even 50% of the target!

 

Seems like your happy to let others pay for the defense of your country whilst still criticizing them for doing so!

 

Let's see how you do on your own.

The US will only enter at half time and only when they themselves are forced to enter.

 

You do know its in the US interests to help dont you?

[billd766]

1 minute ago, rhyddid said:

Nato, shall be dismantled ASAP !

What a load of bovine excretia.

[Becker]

41 minutes ago, rhyddid said:

Nato, shall be dismantled ASAP !

And trolls shall be vanquished post haste!

[Thongkorn]

14 hours ago, steve187 said:

 

i think some countries need to pay more, esp some of the micky mouse countries, that are in it without paying much

 

 

Britain has been paying into Nato since 1947, France since about 1973, Germany very littel along with all the rest. So this graph means very little.

[Salerno]

Only if you can't read graphs  

[puck2]

On 11/9/2019 at 11:48 AM, spidermike007 said:

A more accurate statement would have been for Pompeo to say both myself, and my political master must change. We are both ignorant of world affairs and diplomacy. And we have been terrible for the alliance, and have treated our allies with no respect whatsoever.

 

Pompeo lecturing NATO? You have got to be kidding. This guy is the very epitome of an empty suit.

This fat man has already forgotten, that the USA pressed the NATO-members to follow in the manipulated Iraq-War. Would you like to trust them ... and especially the Liars Of The United States ... and to support their weapon industry???

 

Again the incredible arrogance of the new US-dictator clique.

 

Europe's energy supplies should not depend on Russian President Vladimir Putin, he said.

 

Translate it like this: You have to buy the US (cracking) oil.

 

[Sujo]

On 11/9/2019 at 4:46 PM, Longcut said:

I suppose you can back up that accusation? What proof do you have of such a statement?

Eh.

 

Trump in the oval office with a couple of russkies telling them intel from israel didnt really go down well with netanyahu and mossad.

[Crazy Alex]

Well yes. Obviously, most if not all organizations have to change and evolve or risk becoming obsolete. Just look at Blockbuster, Polaroid and other companies who didn't evolve with the times and changing needs. A political/defense organization like NATO is not immune from becoming obsolete.

 

I'm not sure how this is really news.