Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Nato Chief Seeks Closer Ties With India, China

Discussion in 'International Relations' started by Osiris, Oct 8, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Osiris

    Osiris Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,494
    Likes Received:
    742
    RTTNews) - The US-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) must explore the possibility of entering into new partnerships with emerging global powerhouses like India and China, the security alliance's chief said on Thursday.

    Significantly, the remarks by Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen came ahead of the Brussels-headquartered organization's November 19-20 summit in the Portugese capital, Lisbon.

    At the conclave member countries are expected to adopt a new 'strategic concept' - which charts out the alliance's future course of action.

    "We should reach out to new and important partners, including China and India. We should encourage consultations between interested allies and partners on security issues of common concern, with Nato as a hub for those discussions," Rasmussen said in his blog.

    He further opined that 'the pillars' upon which NATO was founded in 1949 - including the principle of collective defence, a powerful military capability and strong transatlantic relations - were 'still fundamental.'

    Citing the instance of Afghanistan where its military mission has the backing of the alliance's 28 member states, as well as 19 non-Nato members, Rasmussen said Nato ought to look beyond its borders.

    According to the Nato Chief, the need for wider engagement was all the more important since threats to member states could emerge from any part of the world and even from cyberspace.

    "Defense of our territory and our citizens no longer begin at our borders. Threats can originate from Kandahar or from cyberspace ... As a consequence, NATO must build more partnerships and engage more with the wider world," Rasmussen added.

    Nato Chief Seeks Closer Ties With India, China
     
  2. abirbec04

    abirbec04 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,120
    Likes Received:
    402
    I for one don't want to see India have anything to do with NATO rather than closer "DIPLOMATIC" ties. "NATO" has nothing to do with us and now that their existence and relevance as an organization is threatened they want us to join their "CAUSE".

    What were they doing for the last 40 years? They have significantly kept 1/3 rd of the world population out of NATO.

    Thank you very much but we are not interested.
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. siegecrossbow

    siegecrossbow 2nd Lieutant ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    Messages:
    332
    Likes Received:
    147
    As of now we have to understand that this is merely a gesture of goodwill, nothing more.
     
  4. Arjun MBT

    Arjun MBT Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,301
    Likes Received:
    192
    Where was the So Called NATO Power A Decade back??? Now they are ready to have Any one to be a part of there loosing game , I am Sorry India does not have anything In Common to Be a Part of an Umbrella Group called NATO Headed By USA, India simply is not ready or willing to Loose Its Sovereignty
     
  5. True_Indian

    True_Indian 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    71
    He meant india and china should help Nato in wot. If india and china may be other countries too send troops and share work load we can flush out all terrorists..isn't it a good cause..if not comfortable we can go under the banner of UN also.
     
  6. Arjun MBT

    Arjun MBT Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,301
    Likes Received:
    192
    Why should we be a Part of the Mess which Was created By Them with the Help Of ISI, So its there prime responsibility to Finish it aswell, More over India is Spending Billions In Afghanistan to Recreate what they Lost, may it be In terms Of Infrastructure, Health or Education ....
     
  7. True_Indian

    True_Indian 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    71
    Afghan is strategicaly important, that.why we are there..or else we would give some money and leave. Now if can have greater influence in afghan it's better or else when america leaves with a broken leg, pak will take over and it will become a feeding ground of anti india terrorists.
     
  8. Osiris

    Osiris Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,494
    Likes Received:
    742
    Alliance Chief Introduces 'NATO 3.0'

    BRUSSELS -- NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has showcased NATO's new strategic concept as a "blueprint" for the alliance's third coming.

    Borrowing from computer jargon, Rasmussen described the alliance of the Cold War era as "NATO 1.0," followed by "NATO 2.0" between 1991 and 2011.

    Now, Rasmussen said, "NATO 3.0" is being forged, "an alliance which can defend the 900 million citizens of NATO countries against the threats we face today and will face in the coming decade. The strategic concept is the blueprint for that new NATO."

    The new concept will mark the first time in the alliance's history that Russia is not characterized as a threat.

    Indeed, during a 40-minute speech, the NATO chief did not refer to Russia once. Pressed for details by reporters, he described the country as a "partner" in a range of collective endeavors ranging from counterterrorism activities to a possible joint missile-defense venture.

    This spring, a report drawn up by experts led by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright noted that some of the allies have "strained feelings" when it comes to Moscow and are "more skeptical than others about the Russian government's commitment to a positive relationship."

    End Of Article 5?

    Rasmussen's conciliatory tone comes after months of fierce pressure from Moscow, which rejects characterizations of it as a threat. This tension is why Russia has not yet confirmed its participation at the NATO-Russia Council meeting that the alliance hopes to arrange on the sidelines of the Lisbon summit.

    Diplomats say there is disagreement within the alliance as to how much prominence to give Article 5, which enshrines NATO's commitment to collective defense.

    Speaking to Estonian TV on September 27, Estonia's ambassador to NATO, Juri Luik, said, "There are countries that would like to focus on new threats and stress that the world has completely changed and that everything that happened during the Cold War is no longer relevant."

    The new strategic concept will be a "relatively short document," Luik noted, adding that "the question is how the issue [of Article 5] will be balanced vis-a-vis other issues."

    Estonia, together with the other Baltic countries and Poland, has made no secret that it continues to view Russia as a threat. All four have protested vociferously against French plans -- now confirmed -- to sell Russia Mistral-class advanced amphibious-assault ships. All four also want NATO to draw up detailed contingency plans in case they should be attacked.

    Another issue that continues to divide the allies is the future of nuclear weapons in Europe. Germany and France lead a group of countries intent on removing U.S. warheads from the continent.

    Global Partnerships

    Rasmussen said NATO's "fundamentals" would not change and the commitment to collective defense will remain the cornerstone of the alliance. He said NATO would strive for global supremacy unmatched by anyone else and remain the preeminent forum for political consultations between the United States and its European allies.

    But Rasmussen also said that NATO was now facing "new types of threat" -- including cyberwarfare, attacks on energy infrastructure, and missile strikes. For that reason, he said, the alliance must renew its capabilities, with an emphasis on mobile and easily deployable forces.

    The NATO chief also underscored the need for better coordination with the European Union and the United Nations and said the alliance needed its own civilian crisis-management capability.

    Rasmussen avoided the phrase "out-of-area" and said NATO was not looking for "new involvements or new missions."

    In an attempt to address other countries' unease when it comes to NATO's possible global ambitions, Rasmussen said the new strategic concept would spell out provisions for what he called "cooperative security."

    "There is a third area where NATO must take the next step, engaging with the wider world to build cooperative security," Rasmussen said. "In [a] nutshell, the alliance must develop deeper, wider political and practical partnerships with countries around the globe."

    Rasmussen listed China, India, and Pakistan as potential leading partners.

    The NATO secretary-general also issued another impassioned plea to European allies to not let the economic crisis impact their funding contributions to the alliance.

    He said some governments risked "cutting into [NATO's] muscle and bone" in their austerity drives, and warned that a militarily emasculated Europe might force the United States to look for partners "elsewhere."

    Alliance Chief Introduces 'NATO 3.0' | EurasiaNet.org
     
  9. Dilemma

    Dilemma Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,402
    Likes Received:
    360
    If India would not have increased defense spending and China would not have modernized its military, NATO could have cared less.
     
  10. Rangan

    Rangan REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    We should always try to maintain our neutral position otherwise our reputation among the international community will be degraded and effectively harm our ambition of becoming a world power.
     
  11. Rangan

    Rangan REGISTERED

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who are terrorists ?
     
  12. GUNS-N- ROSES

    GUNS-N- ROSES Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    843
    Country Flag:
    India
    NATO to me has lost its significance. however as a good will gensture we can keep a certain diplomatic ties
     
  13. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,049
    Likes Received:
    364
    NATO is better of trying to improve its image through international cooperation similar to UN peace keeping force rather than a combative military faction. The last thing they should be accepting other than mutual diplomatic ties is a nod from either us or the CCP. On what grounds do we share any objective? Let's see:

    - No explicit enemy
    - No equal sharing
    - No equal command
    - NO CAUSE
    - No relevance to current world political scenario.

    Other than common terrorist problem, there is nothing that NATO and we share. I wonder why does NATO even exist any longer after USSR has passed away. Even for USA, it is a liability with only UK, France and Germany having some capability to fight. Now even UK is weak. That leaves a neutral France and an inactive Germany.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page