|
20 January 2010 By Rick Rozoff Extending
Article 5 protection, hitherto limited to full member
states, to Israel was being advocated with the
inescapable implication that a coalition of most of
the world’s most powerful military nations, led by the
self-designated world’s sole military superpower,
would retaliate against Iran if it responded to an
Israeli first strike attack. As the U.S. stations
hundreds of nuclear warheads at NATO bases in Europe,
including in Iran’s neighbor Turkey, invoking NATO’s
war clause could provoke a nuclear conflagration. “Washington has no plans to restrict the expansion
only by admitting Israel. The alliance desires to
attract India, Japan, Australia and Singapore….The
continuation of NATO expansion is undoubtedly an
alarming and dangerous idea that could split the world
into groups of countries that oppose each
other….According to the NATO Charter, an attack on a
member state is considered as an aggression against
all the members of the alliance [and] any conflict of
Israel with its neighbours could become a source of a
large-scale regional conflict that could turn into a
global war.” As the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is
pressuring its 28 member states and dozens of
partnership affiliates on five continents to
contribute more troops for the war in Afghanistan, the
Jerusalem Post reported on January 13 that “Israel is
launching a diplomatic initiative in an effort to
influence the outcome of NATO’s new Strategic Concept
which is currently under review by a team of experts
led by former United States Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright.” [1] NATO is crafting its updated Strategic Concept to
replace that last formulated in 1999, the year of the
military bloc’s expansion into Eastern Europe and its
first full-fledged war, the 78-day bombing campaign
against Yugoslavia. Madeleine Albright, arguably the individual most
publicly identified with orchestrating both NATO’s
absorption of three former Warsaw Pact members,
including her native Czech Republic, and in launching
Operation Allied Force, co-chairs NATO’s Group of
Experts with Jeroen van der Veer, CEO of Royal Dutch
Shell until June of 2009. In addition, “To ensure close coordination between
the Group of Experts and NATO Headquarters, the
Secretary General has designated a small NATO team
lead by Dr. Jamie Shea, head of Policy Planning Unit,
to function as a secretariat and staff support.” [2]
Shea was NATO spokesman in 1999 and is now Director of
Policy Planning in the Private Office of the Secretary
General at NATO Headquarters. Last October 1 NATO and Lloyd’s of London (“the
world’s leading insurance market” in its own words)
co-organized a conference in London to unveil and
promote the new Strategic Concept. Secretary General
Anders Fogh Rasmussen of NATO and Lloyd’s chairman
Lord Peter Levene delivered the major addresses. Host Levene conjured up “a myriad of determined and
deadly threats” that required NATO intervention
worldwide and Rasmussen itemized no fewer than
eighteen of those – none remotely resembling a
military attack on or challenge to a single member
state. [3] Recently Madeleine Albright has been traveling to
several European capitals to preside over a series of
seminars on the updated Strategic Concept and the
latest of those, in Oslo, Norway on January 13, was
attended by officials from the Israeli Foreign
Ministry. In preparation for the above meeting “Several weeks
ago, a former senior Israeli diplomat met privately
with Albright to discuss Israeli interests in the
concept that is under review.” [4] The same source added the following background
information: “Israeli-NATO ties have increased dramatically in
recent years. Chairman of the Military Committee,
Admiral Giampaolo Di Paola visited Israel in November,
and the Israeli Navy has announced plans to deploy a
missile ship with Active Endeavour, a NATO mission to
patrol the Mediterranean Sea…. “Israel is also seeking to receive an upgraded
status following the conclusion of the Strategic
Concept review that will enable Israeli officials to
participate in top NATO forums….Israel is a member of
the Mediterranean Dialogue, which was created in 1994
to foster ties with Middle Eastern countries like
Israel, Jordan, Egypt and Morocco.” [5] By 2000 NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue had expanded
to include seven nations in the Middle East and
Africa: Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Mauritania,
Morocco and Tunisia. 1994 was the same year that the North Atlantic bloc
launched the Partnership for Peace (PfP) program. Both
partnerships were inaugurated only three years after
the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the breakup of
the Soviet Union left not only Eastern Europe but the
Middle East, Africa and Asia open to Western military
penetration and expansion. The Partnership for Peace has included all fifteen
former Soviet and all six former Yugoslav federal
republics as well as all non-Soviet Warsaw Pact
members. Twelve of those – Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia,
the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia –
became full NATO members in the decade ending last
year after passing through the PfP. In addition, the program takes in all former
neutral, non-aligned states in Europe except for
Cyprus: Austria, Finland, Ireland, Malta, Sweden and
Switzerland. Malta withdrew from the PfP in 1996 but
was reabsorbed in 2008. Pro-U.S. parties in the
Cypriot parliament are waging an all-out campaign to
drag their nation into the program. Except for Malta, only recently reentering the PfP,
the six nations listed above have sent troop
contingents of varying sizes to Afghanistan to serve
under NATO command. The only countries in all of
Europe (excluding the microstates of Andorra,
Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, San Marino, and Vatican
City), including the Caucasus, that have not offered
troops for the Afghan war front to date are Russia,
Belarus, Serbia, Malta, Moldova and Cyprus. At its 2004 summit in Istanbul, Turkey the largest
single expansion of NATO in its history occurred as
seven states were brought in as full members, all in
Eastern Europe and including the first former Soviet
and former Yugoslav republics recruited as full
members of the Alliance. The Istanbul summit also lent itself to another,
similarly ambitious, project: The Istanbul Cooperation
Initiative (ICI). [6] The ICI purposed to elevate the
seven Mediterranean Dialogue partners to a status
analogous to that of the Partnership for Peace and to
consolidate military ties with the six members of the
Gulf Cooperation Council: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman,
Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Since Algeria joined the Mediterranean Dialogue in
2000, Montenegro became an independent state in 2006
and joined the Partnership for Peace the same year,
and Malta rejoined the latter two years later, every
Mediterranean littoral and island nation except – for
the moment – Cyprus, Lebanon, Libya and Syria is
either a NATO member or partner. The Mediterranean
Dialogue also allows NATO to stretch down the Atlantic
Coast of Africa to Morocco and Mauritania. If the accession of new members and the Partnership
for Peace provided NATO with outposts on Russia’s
borders (Azerbaijan, Estonia, Finland, Georgia,
Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine) and
on China’s (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan),
the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative has allowed for
the further encirclement of Iran by moving Alliance
influence and military presence into the Persian Gulf. Of the thirteen Middle Eastern and African nations
targeted by it, Israel is the one that most
immediately and substantively seized on the
opportunity the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative
offered. The enhanced status of the Mediterranean Dialogue
led within months of the Istanbul NATO summit to
Israel engaging in Alliance activities for the first
time. On February 24, 2005 Jaap de Hoop Scheffer became
the first NATO secretary general to visit Israel and
the next month “Israel and NATO conducted their first
ever joint naval exercise in the Red Sea, signalling a
strengthening of relations.” An Alliance naval group
visited the Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat for a
week-long visit, “which included a joint exercise with
the Israel Navy.” [7] As Britain’s Jane’s Defence Weekly reported, “The
novelty in the exercise was the fact it was conducted
with NATO ships, which operate regularly in the
Mediterranean, but rarely visit the Red Sea.” [8] In May of the same year it was announced that
“Israel plans to stage three military exercises with
NATO during 2005. “Israeli officials said the government of Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon has submitted a plan to NATO
that would include the staging of three exercises with
Israel’s military over the next 10 months. They said
the exercises would take place at NATO headquarters in
Brussels….” An Israeli official was cited as saying, “We have
no doubt that Israel will gain immensely from closer
ties with NATO, and we also believe that Israel has
much to offer NATO in return.” [9] In the same month a planning conference for
“NATO-led military exercises in the framework of the
Partnership for Peace” program was held in Macedonia
and was “attended by representatives of over 20
countries, including, for the first time, two
countries from the so-called Mediterranean Dialogue –
Israel and Jordan.” [10] Jane’s again: “Whereas Israel’s geopolitical
location could offer an ‘external base’ for the
defence of the West, NATO’s military and economic
status could provide added security and economic
benefits for the host state. “In a rapidly changing strategic environment,
Israeli policy makers are recognising definite
advantages, especially in security affairs, in
developing closer ties with NATO. The present Israeli
government’s enthusiasm for this project can be seen
in an ambitious set of proposals submitted to the
Alliance,” which included “joint military training
[and] future joint development of weapons systems.”
[11] In June “The Israeli navy participated for the
first time in a NATO submarine exercise in the Gulf of
Taranto off the Italian coast,” Sorbet Royal 2005.
“Israel was seeking to extend its strategic alliance
with NATO beyond what is offered to its Mediterranean
cooperation group, even up to full membership of
NATO.” [12] According to an Israeli account before the war
games began, “14 nations and about 2,000 forces are to
spend the next three weeks hunting for four submarines
resting on the ocean floor….” [13] In July of 2005 Israeli ground troops participated
in a NATO military exercise for the first time, a
22-nation training mission in Ukraine that lasted for
two and a half weeks. “The drill dealt mainly with
antiterrorism combat and low-intensity conflict, but
it also symbolized an increasing participation of
Israeli forces in NATO.” Israeli Colonel Alon Friedman said on the occasion
that “There have been senior commanders who have gone
to NATO events as well as consultants, but never
combatants like this.” The Jerusalem Post reported
that “Friedman said he was not privy to the diplomatic
moves to get the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] more
involved in NATO, but he understood the initiative
came from NATO.” [14] By the following year the level of collaboration
between the world’s sole military bloc and Israel had
increased further. A column appeared at an Israeli
news site on February 1 called “Is Israel headed for
NATO?” authored by Uzi Arad. Arad established the
Atlantic Forum of Israel in 2004 and still chairs the
organization. The Atlantic Forum is the main vehicle
for promoting NATO-Israel integration on the Israeli
side. It’s website, currently under construction,
features a Star of David side-by-side with the NATO
symbol. [15] Uzi Arad has an interesting biography, both before
and after the founding of the Atlantic Forum. He was
the Foreign Policy Advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu from 1997-1999 “on secondment from the
Mossad, in which he served for more than two decades,
culminating in his tenure as Director of Research
(Intelligence).” [16] He has also been Advisor to the
Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. Complications developed last year when was
“designated to become chairman of the National
Security Council under Netanyahu,” but “The press in
Washington…reported that Arad had been refused
permission to enter the country” [17] because of “his
alleged contacts with Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin,
who has been convicted of passing information to
Israel.” [18] By the end of last March the Obama
administration nevertheless approved his visa
application for discussions in Washington on Iran. An Israeli newspaper described his major project:
“Working closely with NATO, the Atlantic Forum of
Israel seeks to promote and enhance Israel’s relations
and standing with the Atlantic Alliance and has played
an important role in advancing this relationship.”
[19] In the aforementioned article of Arad’s in February
of 2006 he wrote “For the past two years, cooperation
between Israel and NATO has become closer, to a
certain degree – both on a multilateral level, within
the Mediterranean Dialogue, and on a bilateral level,
directly with NATO.” He added that “Last year, Israeli Ambassador [to
the European Union in Brussels and envoy to NATO] Oded
Eran submitted an official proposal for increasing
cooperation, and since the visit of NATO Secretary
General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer to Israel last June,
NATO and Israel have been negotiating over completing
the multilateral cooperation plan. “Israel consented, and announced its willingness to
participate in Operation Active Endeavor, which is
being conducted in the Mediterranean Sea as part of
the alliance’s counter-terrorism effort. It also took
part in three military exercises and hosted a
conference of air force commanders from NATO and its
partners.” [20] A feature in the Wall Street Journal a few days
after Arad’s article appeared, “NATO, Israel Draw
Closer,” quoted Arad as asserting: “The only thing
worse than Israel being a member of NATO may be Israel
not being a member of NATO.” It also mentioned another
prime mover in fostering the Israel-NATO nexus, one on
the U.S. (and European) end. “Ronald Asmus, a senior
State Department official during the Clinton
administration who is credited by Mr. Arad with being
an ‘intellectual godfather’ of closer NATO-Israel
links, says arguments against membership remind him of
the initial opposition to NATO enlargement to former
Soviet bloc states or the alliance assuming its first
missions beyond Europe.” [21] The German Marshall Fund of the United States
website provides this background information on Asmus: “Dr. Asmus is currently Executive Director of the
Brussels-based Transatlantic Center and responsible
for Strategic Planning at the German Marshall Fund of
the US. “[He was] Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
European Affairs from 1997-2000 and has been a senior
analyst and fellow at Radio Free Europe, RAND and the
Council on Foreign Relations. He has been a pioneering
voice in the debate over post-Cold War European
security and NATO’s transformation. He has published
widely and is the author of Opening Nato’s Door. “For his ideas and diplomatic accomplishments, he
has been decorated by the U.S. Department of State as
well as the governments of Estonia, Georgia, Italy,
Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Sweden.” [22] The Washington Post published his article “Contain
Iran: Admit Israel to NATO” on February 21, 2006 which
contained these recommendations: “The best way to provide Israel with that
additional security is to upgrade its relationship
with the collective defense arm of the West: NATO.
Whether that upgraded relationship culminates in
membership for Israel or simply a much closer
strategic and operational defense relationship can be
debated.” “Several leading Europeans have called for NATO to
embrace Israel, but this debate will not get serious
until the United States, Israel’s main ally, puts its
weight behind the idea. The time has come to do so.”
[23] Earlier in the month he co-authored a lengthy piece
called “Does Israel Belong In the EU and NATO?” with
Bruce P. Jackson. Jackson was the founder and head of
the U.S. Committee on NATO/Expand NATO and the
Committee for the Liberation of Iraq set up four
months before the invasion of the nation and is on the
Board of Directors of the Project for the New American
Century. Asmus and Jackson wrote that “what some
Israeli strategic thinkers are starting to discuss –
and what we are addressing here – is…an upgraded
strategic relationship between Israel and EuroAtlantic
institutions like NATO and the EU that would lead to
increasingly closer ties and could include eventual
membership.” [24] The third leg of the Israel-NATO integration stool
is Ivo Daalder, until recently Senior Fellow at the
Brookings Institution and now the new U.S.
administration’s ambassador to NATO where he has a
free hand to implement his projects. In the September/October issue of Foreign Affairs,
published by the Council on Foreign Relations, he and
co-author James Goldgeier, Adjunct Senior Fellow at
the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote an article
called “Global NATO” which included this excerpt: “With little fanfare – and even less notice – the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization has gone global.” What Daalder had in mind had been adumbrated two
years earlier when he wrote “We need an Alliance of
Democratic States. This organization would unite
nations with entrenched democratic traditions, such as
the United States and Canada; the European Union
countries; Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and
Australia; India and Israel; Botswana and Costa Rica.”
[25] NATO will be the framework for a new U.S.-led
global order with the United Nations reduced to a mere
handmaiden and cleanup service. In March of 2006 James Jones, then military chief
of the Pentagon’s European Command and NATO Supreme
Allied Commander Europe and now U.S. National Security
Adviser, commented on another advance in NATO-Israeli
military integration, the first deployment of NATO
AWACS to Israel for a military exercise “apparently as
a signal to Iran”: “We’ve had NATO AWACS deployed to do some
demonstrations in Israel, and we do have an active
dialogue with the Israeli defense force in terms of
interoperability, and particularly as it regards the
security of the Mediterranean basin at sea.” [26] In May eight NATO warships docked in the Israeli
port city of Haifa “which the military said was an
indication of strengthening ties between Israel and
the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation” preparatory to
the Israeli Navy “tak[ing] part for the first time in
a NATO naval exercise in the Black Sea in June….” [27]
That month the Israeli navy missile ship Achi Eilat
left Haifa with its NATO counterparts to join in
Operation Mako, “a ten-country joint training exercise
in the Black Sea led by NATO-Mediterranean Dialogue
countries.” The war games also included ships from
“Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, France, Albania, Algeria,
Georgia, the United Arab Emirates and others.” The
event marked “the first time that an operational unit
of the IDF will fully participate with NATO in a
military-like operation.” [28] (By way of follow up,
on January 11, 2010 Focus News Agency in Bulgaria
revealed that the Israeli Air Force plans to use bases
in that country for training exercises.) NATO reported on the exercises, especially in
reference to the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative, that
“over 2000 personnel and some 25 ships from NATO and
Partner countries are rehearsing joint operations at
sea in and around Constanta, Romania” where the U.S.
and NATO have subsequently acquired a strategic
military base. “Nine NATO countries are taking part (Bulgaria,
France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Romania, Spain, Turkey
and the United Kingdom), four Partner countries
(Albania, Azerbaijan, Croatia and Georgia) as well as
two Mediterranean Dialogue countries (Algeria and
Israel). “In addition, for the first time, the exercise is
being observed by a country from NATO’s Istanbul
Cooperation Initiative – the United Arab Emirates.”
[29] “The purpose of the exercise [is] to create better
interoperability between the Israeli Navy and NATO
naval forces. Israel was invited to participate in the
exercise as a member of NATO’s Mediterranean
Dialogue.” [30] In the same month the Israeli Defense Ministry
acknowledged that “In a move intended to further
bolster ties between Israel and NATO, the IDF is
putting search-and-rescue forces on standby so they
can be immediately dispatched to participate in NATO
global operations.” In addition, it was announced that “Israel might
also be willing to send field hospitals to NATO
peacekeeping forces stationed around the world” and
“The IDF has also decided to dispatch a high-ranking
navy officer to Naples in the coming months, where he
will participate in NATO’s…Operation Active Endeavor.”
[31] Toward the end of June a U.S. Congressional
committee “unanimously approved a resolution that
calls for enhancing Israel’s relationship with NATO.” “The resolution recommends upgrading Israel’s
affiliation to a ‘leading member of NATO’s Individual
Cooperation Program,’ a promotion the bill says
ultimately will lead to Israel’s full membership in
the alliance.” [32] The Individual Cooperation Program was a provision
made available to Mediterranean Dialogue members
within the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative. On October
16, 2006 NATO and Israel concluded an Individual
Cooperation Program agreement. “Israel and NATO have approved a long-term plan for
cooperation in 27 different areas” and “Israel is the
first non-European country, and the first in the
Middle East to cooperate with NATO and reach a
bilateral agreement with the organization.” [33] Indeed, it is the only country (excepting Iceland)
outside of Europe that is included in the U.S.
European Command’s area of responsibility. (As
neighboring Egypt is the only African nation not in
Africa Command.) The rest of the Middle East, like
Egypt, is covered by Central Command. For NATO’s
purposes Israel – like the South Caucasus states of
Armenia and Georgia if not Azerbaijan – is for all
intents a European nation. As the country’s minister of foreign affairs Tzipi
Livni said at the NATO’s Transformation, the
Mediterranean Dialogue, and NATO-Israel Relations
seminar in Herzliya on October 24, 2006, “The alliance
between NATO and Israel is only natural….Israel and
NATO share a common strategic vision….[T]hreats, aimed
at Israel and the western-valued moderate community,
position Israel more then ever before on the
Euro-Atlantic side. In many ways, Israel is the front
line defending our common way of life.” [34] The two-day conference was organized by the
Atlantic Forum of Israel and the NATO Public Diplomacy
Division and occurred only two months after the end of
Israel’s second Lebanon war, which displaced 900,000
Lebanese, a quarter of the nation’s population. Delivering her address at the meeting, Livni
acknowledged “it is…no secret that Israel preferred
the involvement of the forces of NATO in Lebanon….In
meeting these strategic threats, NATO is most
essential.” She also said “Israel will be glad to
cooperate and participate in positive NATO regional
and local initiatives, among them: the Mediterranean
Dialogue; the like minded global partnership; and the
inclusion of Israel in the PFP (Partnership For Peace)
NATO program.” [35] NATO was represented by Deputy Secretary General
Alessandro Minuto Rizzo, whose keynote address
included: “We have recently agreed [upon] an individual
cooperation programme – or ICP. This programme is the
first of its kind in the Mediterranean Dialogue….Just
a few weeks ago, an exchange of letters between NATO
and Israel set the stage for an Israeli contribution
to Active Endeavour….This will be the first
contribution from a Mediterranean Dialogue nation and
represents another truly significant step forward for
both NATO and Israel. “The posting of an Israeli Liaison Officer to the
NATO Command in Naples is a further indication of the
vitality of our cooperation, as was the demonstration
of a NATO AWACS plane in Israel. And, last but not
least, over the course of this year, Israel has
participated in two major NATO/PfP military exercises
in Romania and Ukraine.” [36] A retired Israeli intelligence officer told an
American news agency that the Individual Cooperation
Program with NATO “allows for 2,000 joint activities –
thrice the volume open to the countries involved in
the Mediterranean Dialogue.” [37] The previously mentioned Oded Eran, Israel’s
representative at NATO headquarters, alluding to the
Alliance’s military assistance clause, was quoted by
the same source as saying that what had been achieved
was “a multilateral umbrella….We don’t necessarily
need article 5. The very fact we’re members of such an
organization gives…a sort of guarantee.” [38] By the end of 2006 Israel-NATO military integration
had proceeded to the stage that: The Jewish state was granted a partnership
agreement with the Western military bloc more advanced
than any accorded any other nation outside of Europe. The nation’s foreign minister publicly called for
her country’s inclusion in NATO’s Partnership for
Peace program, which has recently successfully groomed
twelve other states for full membership in the bloc. Calls were being made in the West and Israel alike
for the latter’s full membership in NATO. Extending Article 5 protection, hitherto limited to
full member states, to Israel was being advocated with
the inescapable implication that a coalition of most
of the world’s most powerful military nations, led by
the self-designated world’s sole military superpower,
would retaliate against Iran if it responded to an
Israeli first strike attack. As the U.S. stations
hundreds of nuclear warheads at NATO bases in Europe,
including in Iran’s neighbor Turkey, invoking NATO’s
war clause could provoke a nuclear conflagration. The nation was being promoted as the linchpin of a
new Global NATO as now U.S. ambassador to the Alliance
Ivo Daalder openly proclaimed it. In 2007 a Russian analyst warned of the
consequences of the above developments: “By admitting Israel Washington plans to use the
alliance as an instrument for exerting pressure on
Arab states and strengthening its position in the
Middle East….Washington has no plans to restrict the
expansion only by admitting Israel. The alliance
desires to attract India, Japan, Australia and
Singapore….The continuation of NATO expansion is
undoubtedly an alarming and dangerous idea that could
split the world into groups of countries that oppose
each other….According to the NATO Charter, an attack
on a member state is considered as an aggression
against all the members of the alliance [and] any
conflict of Israel with its neighbours could become a
source of a large-scale regional conflict that could
turn into a global war.” [39] Undeterred by such grave considerations, even the
threat of world war, Washington, Brussels and Tel Aviv
continued their joint military collaboration. In April of 2007 six NATO warships – from Germany,
Greece, Italy, Spain and Turkey – docked in the
Israeli Red Sea port of Eilat “for joint drills with
the navy’s Red Sea Task Force.” [40] NATO had in
effect extended its comprehensive Mediterranean Sea
naval surveillance and interdiction operation, Active
Endeavor, to the Red Sea and would later establish a
permanent presence in the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian
Sea. “Six NATO frigates commanded by a Turkish admiral
arrived…in Haifa for a joint drill with Israeli Navy
missile boats. “Israel has been shoring up ties recently with NATO
as part of preparations for any future showdown with
Iran.” [41] Following the signing of the Individual Cooperation
Program (ICP) the preceding November, in June NATO’s
Assistant Secretary General for Defence Policy and
Planning John Colston visited Israel and invited the
nation to provide troops for international Alliance
missions. “We welcome very strongly the interest of a
whole range of partner nations in participating in
NATO-led operations around the world. There are
currently seven to eight thousand troops from non-NATO
nations participating in missions and further such
contributions are always welcome.” In Colson’s words,
troop and other contributions – presumably to
Afghanistan in the first case – would “fill the ICP
framework with practical cooperation.” The NATO official confirmed his organization’s
plans to “add Israel to NATO’s ‘operational
capabilities concept’ with the goal of creating better
cooperation between the militaries…that would lay the
groundwork for potential Israeli participation in
NATO-led missions.” What such missions would entail was indicated by
Colson’s announcement that “We agreed to share lessons
from Afghanistan with Israel to gain and benefit from
one another.” [42] NATO Deputy Secretary-General Claudio Bisogniero
visited Israel in October for two days of meetings
arranged by the Atlantic Forum of Israel. “Bisogniero
and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni are set to address
the second annual NATO Israel Symposium at the
Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya on Monday night,
to be followed the next day by a seminar on NATO’s
role in the Middle East,” a follow up to the 2006
two-day affair also addressed by Livni and by
Bisogniero’s predecessor, Alessandro Minuto Rizzo.
Bisogniero arrived only three weeks after taking up
his post and his trip marked the first anniversary of
Israel’s Individual Cooperation Program with NATO. The Atlantic Forum’s Uzi Arad said of the event
“There is an evolving process of Israel and NATO
drawing together. NATO is constantly transforming
itself. As it looks at its role outside of Europe and
in the Middle East, it looks into the prospect of
closer Israel-NATO relations.” [43] The most significant comment at the symposium came
from a (once and future) Israeli head of state:
“Addressing the Atlantic Forum’s symposium in
Hertzliyah…former prime minister Netanyahu urged NATO
to accept Israel as a ‘full partner’ by the year
2010.” [44] The next month the chiefs of general staff of
Israel and Egypt (which followed Israel in entering
into an Individual Cooperation Program) participated
in a meeting of all 26 of their counterparts from NATO
member states. In fact, “Chiefs of Defence of more
than 60 Countries together with NATO’s Supreme Allied
Commander for Operations and NATO’s Supreme Allied
Commander for Transformation attended, at various
levels, the NATO Military Committee Meetings.” [45]
In December an Indian news source revealed more
about NATO’s increased cooperation with Israel within
the context of building an Asia-Pacific and beyond
that a Global NATO. “India will join North Atlantic
Treaty Organisation (Nato) countries, as well as
Israel, Japan, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand at
the Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada in the United
States in June-July 2008 for the Red Flag wargames for
the first time.” [46] Israeli warplanes also participated in the 2009 Red
Flag exercises. This came against the backdrop of Israeli Deputy
Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs
Avigdor Lieberman (current Minister of Foreign Affairs
and Deputy Prime Minister), then past and future U.S.
presidential candidates John Edwards and Rudolph
Giuliani, former Spanish prime minister Jose Maria
Aznar and other major Western figures demanding full
NATO membership for Israel. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who wrote
two articles as far back as 2001 urging NATO to take
over the Palestinian Gaza Strip and West Bank, in 2003
advocated that not only Israel but Egypt and
(post-invasion) Iraq be welcomed as NATO member
states. Incidentally, Friedman’s call for NATO to
subjugate Palestine was echoed in differing degrees by
James Jones when he was U.S. Special Envoy for Middle
East Security and by Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent
Scowcroft in 2008. The Jerusalem Post wrote early in
that year about Jones, previously supreme commander of
NATO and now the Obama administration’s National
Security Adviser, that “The United States is reviewing
the feasibility of deploying a NATO force in the West
Bank as a way to ease IDF security concerns….The plan,
which is being spearheaded by US Special Envoy to the
region Gen. James Jones, is being floated among
European countries, which could be asked to contribute
troops to a West Bank Another news source described the plan in franker
terms: “James Jones, a former Marine Corps general and
NATO military commander from 2003-2005, has been
assigned the task of preparing a plan to take over the
military occupation of the Occupied Territories of
Palestine on behalf of Israel’s security interests. “The plan for the West Bank will try to draw from
the experience made by the deployment of the UNIFIL-forces,
led by NATO-countries, but engaging African and Asian
troops as well in southern Lebanon.” [48] NATO plans reach far beyond contingencies for
patrolling Israel’s borders with Gaza and the West
Bank and even occupying and subjugating Palestinian
territories. A former George H.W. Bush administration State
Department official (in the Bureau of
Politico-Military Affairs), Bennett Ramberg, wrote an
article for a major U.S. newspaper almost two years
ago bearing the title “An Israeli-NATO pact.” It
presented a scenario for military confrontation with
Iran and overcoming Russian air defenses in that
nation. The writer’s suggestions included: “As NATO expanded its international reach beyond
the European theater in recent years, Israel´s
association has become a matter of discussion in
Brussels….Israel´s integration into NATO, possibly
with a separate American security guarantee, would
provide Israel with the defense in depth it has
yearned for….[S]hould the United States consent to
provide F-22 stealth fighter-bombers, Israel´s
capacity will increase. Equally impressive are the
American-supplied bunker-buster bombs the aircraft may
carry.” [49] In November of 2008 Israeli Chief of the General
Staff Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi attended a
NATO meeting in Brussels in which he “set out the
strategic threats to Israel and appeal[ed] for
increased cooperation….” Ashkenazi addressed the military chiefs of staff of
all twenty six NATO states at the time and “presented
the various threats to the State of Israel, the
strategic challenges in the Middle East and the rise
of global terrorism, as well as the need for increased
cooperation between Israel and NATO members in order
to confront the shared threats.” [50] The following month, December, with Israel’s
Operation Cast Lead assault on Gaza only weeks away,
NATO expanded and enhanced its Individual Cooperation
Program with Israel. “The agreement allows for an
exchange of intelligence information and security
expertise on different subjects, an increase in the
number of joint Israel-NATO military exercises and
further cooperation in the fight against nuclear
proliferation. “It also paves the way for an improvement of
collaboration in the fields of rearmament and
logistics and Israel’s electronic link to the NATO
system.” Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs Livni was
present for the signing of the pact and said,
“Israel’s security capabilities are a household name
and we see the strengthening of cooperation between
Israel and the international security body as a
strategic objective that reinforces Israel. “Israel is a power within the international index
when it comes to the army and its capabilities in the
fight against terror; the whole world recognizes this
and the expansion of cooperation between Israel and
NATO as it was expressed this morning is important
proof of this.” [51] On December 8 NATO hosted a delegation from the
Atlantic Forum of Israel at its headquarters in
Brussels. On December 27 Tel Aviv began its relentless
attacks in Gaza, replete with reports of the use of
white phosphorous bombs and depleted uranium weaponry. The president of the United Nations General
Assembly at the time, Nicaragua’s Miguel d’Escoto
Brockmann, criticized the offensive as a breach of
international law and said, “Gaza is ablaze. It has
been turned into a burning hell.” [52] A week and a half into the attacks a Russian news
source wrote that “American planners want to carry
3,000 tonnes of ammunition from the Greek port of
Astakos to the Israeli port of Ashdod” and “An even
larger shipment of arms, which included laser-guided
bombs, arrived in December.” [53] In the middle of the assaults and carnage NATO
Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer arrived in Tel
Aviv to deliver a speech to the Atlantic Forum
highlighted by his contention that “This is a new
NATO.” In a feature with that title, Israel’s Haaretz
newspaper printed remarks by Scheffer which included: “NATO has transformed to address the challenges of
today and tomorrow. We have built partnerships around
the globe from Japan to Australia to Pakistan and, of
course, with the important countries of the
Mediterranean and the Gulf.” “[The] Alliance is projecting stability in
Afghanistan, in Kosovo, in the Mediterranean (with
Israeli support), and elsewhere – including fighting
pirates off the Somali coast – without in any way
diluting our core task to defend NATO member states
and populations. Finally, we are looking at playing
new roles, as well, in energy security and cyber
defence….” “In 2005 and in 2006 Israel participated in two
NATO military exercises. In addition, the NATO-Israel
Agreement on the Security of Information allows us to
share intelligence….In 2006 Israel decided to
contribute to NATO’s…Operation Active Endeavour in the
Mediterranean….” “Israel has been the first country to finalize with
NATO, in October 2006, a very detailed individual
cooperation program, which had been revised and
upgraded last November.” [54] Scheffer met with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert and Foreign Affairs Minister Tzipi Livni, and
Livni and Scheffer “discussed means of cooperation
between Israel and NATO with regard to the war on
terror and methods of preventing smuggling into the
Gaza Strip” even as the fighting continued.” [55] Olmert assured Scheffer that “Israel stands behind
NATO and fully supports its struggle against
terrorism, just as we expect that you will understand
us in our struggle against terrorism….” He also
“discussed with him the situation in southern Israel
and the Gaza Strip since the beginning of Operation
Cast Lead.” [56] The NATO website reported that Scheffer also met
with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and now prime
minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In his Atlantic Forum
address he said, “Israel has been a most enthusiastic
Mediterranean Dialogue partner and that tells me that
this country knows full well about the Dialogue and
about the benefits that it brings”. [57] In March Livni returned the favor by flying to
Brussels to meet with Scheffer. The next month the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung office
in Jerusalem released the results of a study it
commissioned on Israeli attitudes towards NATO
intervention in the Gaza Strip and full membership in
the military bloc. Dr. Lars Hansel, the head of the
Konrad Adenauer Stiftung in Israel, was quoted by the
Jerusalem Post: “[T]he German marines deployed on the Lebanese
coast…are seen (by Israelis) as a welcome development.
We are clearly sensing a shift in discourse in Israel
about this.” [58] A poll conducted by an Israeli research group
demonstrated how successful the efforts of Uzi Arad’s
Atlantic Forum and its allies have been. “[A] majority of respondents (54%) supported
outright Israeli membership in NATO (33% did not).
Support rose to 60% when only Jewish responses were
counted. Almost two-thirds of Israeli Jews support
sending NATO troops to the West Bank in a peacekeeping
capacity….Israeli Jews supported the presence of NATO
peacekeepers in Palestinian areas by 62 percent to
34%, the study found. But that support was not shared
among Israeli Arabs, who opposed the idea by 44% to
24%.” [59] As an indication that words may soon be translated
into action, Haaretz wrote last April that “The
possibility of an Israeli attack against a nuclear
Iran…will be a test of the willingness of NATO’s
member states to implement Article 5 of the treaty’s
convention….” [60] An analysis published by China’s Xinhua News Agency
last July, “Israel pushes for major upgrade in
relations with NATO,” stated “Reports in the Israeli
media this week suggest that Israel is looking forward
to participation in several key exercises and
operations with NATO and individual NATO members
during the remainder of 2009. “However, this seems to be only part of plans for a
much broader gradual integration into NATO by Israel.” It added “Some reports suggest Israel’s desire to
cooperate with NATO and to up its operational
exercises is Israel’s further preparation for any
attack on Iran.” [61] The same news agency also reported in July that
“the IAF [Israeli Air Force] will take part later this
year in a joint aerial exercise with a NATO-member
state, which is yet to be identified,” quoting
“Israeli defense officials as saying that the overseas
exercises would be used to drill long- range
maneuvers.” The source also mentioned that “In 2007,
Israeli warplanes bombed a suspected nuclear site
inside Syria. “Last summer, over 100 IAF jets flew over Greece in
an exercise widely seen as a test-run for a potential
air raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities.” [62] Late last autumn as the U.S. and NATO prepared to
increase troop strength in Afghanistan to over
150,000, the full reciprocity and the geographical
range of Israeli-NATO military cooperation were
revealed. The Chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, Admiral
Giampaolo Di Paola, paid a two-day visit to Tel Aviv
to meet with leaders of the Israeli Defense Forces
(IDF) and “to study the tactics and methods of the
IDF” and “was studying the IDF in order to gain a
better understanding of how to deal with the ongoing
war in Afghanistan.” [63] A senior Israeli defense official spoke of a
meeting between the head of NATO’s Military Committee
and Israeli Chief of the General Staff
Lieutenant-General Gabi Ashkenazi: “The one thing on
NATO’s mind today is how to win in Afghanistan. [Di
Paola] was very impressed by the IDF, which is a major
source of information due to our operational
experience.” Di Paola “noted that NATO and the IDF were facing
similar threats – NATO in Afghanistan and Israel in
its war against Hamas and Hizbullah.” [64] Israel has trained Czech helicopter crews in a
desert base for deployment to Afghanistan and has
supplied and offered its Heron drones to Canada,
Germany and other NATO states for the war in that
nation. As another portent of what Brussels and Tel Aviv
are jointly anticipating – if not planning – NATO
sponsored a three-day course in Haifa in November that
provided “emergency management professionals with
training on staff teaching and preparation methods in
the face of mass casualty situations. “These situations include all emergencies causing a
large number of casualties that require special
organisation and response by local, regional and
national medical and other services.” [65] Earlier in the month NATO’s Supreme Allied
Commander and U.S. European Command chief Admiral
James Stavridis arrived in the Israeli capital to meet
with “Chief of the General Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi
Ashkenazi, the Deputy Chief of the General Staff, Maj.
Gen. Benjamin Gantz and several other commanders. The
Admiral [was] accompanied by other EUCOM commanders.”
[66] The occasion was the last day of the two-week
Operation Juniper Cobra 10, the most recent and by far
the largest of biennial joint U.S.-Israeli military
exercises. Last year’s was on an unparalleled scale,
in fact the biggest-ever joint war games between the
two nations. 1,400 American troops and seventeen
warships participated in what is probably the most
ambitious layered, integrated missile defense
exercises ever staged anywhere. [67] “An unprecedented
number of American generals, along with 1,400 U.S.
army soldiers, are participating with top IDF brass in
the high-level Juniper Cobra military exercise that
one U.S. Navy commander said is aimed at ’specific
threats.’” [68] The unprecedented drills came shortly after the
current U.S. administration announced plans to cancel
the ground-based midcourse missile project of
President George W. Bush in Eastern Europe in favor of
what President Barack Obama on September 17 affirmed
were “stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of
American forces and America’s allies.” Reports had
surfaced earlier that the U.S. and NATO were to
abandon the project of basing ground-based interceptor
missiles in Poland and a complementary radar
installation in the Czech Republic and instead deploy
far more mobile, often non-detectable missile
interceptor components to Israel, the Balkans, Turkey
and the South Caucasus. [69] Last year’s Juniper Cobra exercises were the
opening salvo for the new plan, clearly prepared for
long in advance. The official purpose was to protect Israel from
possible Iranian missile attacks, but the truth is far
different. More than a year before, the Pentagon’s
European Command, whose top military commander is also
NATO’s supreme commander, installed a missile shield
radar base in Israel’s Negev Desert, near the host
country’s nuclear program at Dimona. The American
Forward Based X-Band Transportable Radar has a range
of 2,900 miles [4,300 kilometers], far more than what
would be required for Iran but sufficient to cover all
of western and much of southern Russia. 120 U.S. military personnel were assigned to the
base, the first foreign troops to ever be stationed in
Israel. Juniper Cobra was the testing phase for U.S.
global interceptor missile deployments in the Middle
East and beyond. The new American plans have been
described by the White House and the Pentagon to be
fully integrated with NATO to encompass all of Europe,
and Israel’s role in those designs is pivotal. Last
autumn’s U.S.-Israeli missile exercises helped “the
United States craft its European missile
shield…Featuring in the…maneuvers is Aegis, a U.S.
Navy anti-missile system that the administration of
President Barack Obama plans to deploy in the eastern
Mediterranean as the first part of a missile shield
for Europe announced last month.” [70] As a U.S. Army officer present for Juniper Cobra
stated at the time, “On a wider perspective, what the
Americans learn from these complex exercises will help
shape a NATO defense shield for Europe.” [71] Earlier this month Israel announced that it has
successfully tested what it calls its Iron Dome short-
and medium-range anti-missile system, which consists
of the newly-developed Arrow 2 and David’s Sling
interceptor missiles. The first Arrow “was deployed in
2000, and Israel and the United States have since
conducted a joint, biennial missile defense exercise,
called Juniper Cobra, to work on integrating the
weapons, radars and other systems of the two
countries.” [72] Last May in the “first meeting of senior Israeli
defense officials with the Obama administration’s new
staff at the Pentagon,” the Director General of
Israeli Ministry of Defense, General Pinchas Buhris,
and American counterparts in Washington, DC it was
announced that the U.S. will fully fund a $100 million
advanced Arrow 3 missile defense system. “Israel and the United States are also developing
David’s Sling – a missile defense system for
medium-range missile with a range between 70 and 250
kilometers. The Arrow 3 will be a longer-range version
of the Arrow defense system currently in IDF
operation. It will be capable of intercepting incoming
enemy missiles at higher altitudes and farther away
from Israel.” [73] In July the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency
worked with Israel to test the Arrow system at a U.S.
range in the Pacific Ocean. The head of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, Army
Lieutenant General Patrick O’Reilly, said regarding
the Pacific drills that “the test will allow Israel to
measure its advanced Arrow system against a target
with a range of more than 620 miles (1,000 km), too
long for previous Arrow test sites in the eastern
Mediterranean. An unnamed U.S. Defense Department official was
quoted by Reuters as saying “The upcoming
test…provides us the opportunity to have the Patriot
system, the THAAD [Terminal High Altitude Area
Defense] system and the Aegis system all interacting
with the Arrow system so that we’re demonstrating full
interoperability as we execute this test.” The same
four interceptor missile systems were used jointly in
the Juniper Cobra exercises in October and November.
[74] Other NATO states are also assisting the missile
and general military buildup for a potential
catastrophe in the Middle East, most notably Germany,
which will double the amount of Dolphin submarines it
has provided Israel. Dolphins are considered capable
of carrying Israeli nuclear cruise missiles for any
future conflict with Iran. “A bigger Dolphin fleet
could allow Israel the option of basing some in its
Red Sea port of Eilat, providing a short-cut to the
Gulf. An Israeli submarine crossed the Suez Canal for
an exercise off Eilat last July, the first such
deployment.” [75] On January 11 Haaretz wrote that “The U.S. Army
will double the value of emergency military equipment
it stockpiles on Israeli soil, and Israel will be
allowed to use the U.S. ordnance in the event of a
military emergency….” Citing the U.S.-based Defense
News, the Israeli newspaper added, “an agreement
reached between Washington and Jerusalem last month
will bring the value of the military gear to $800
million. “This is the final phase of a process that began
over a year ago to determine the type and amount of
U.S. weapons and ammunition to be stored in Israel,
part of an overarching American effort to stockpile
weapons in areas in which its army may need to operate
while allowing American allies to make use of the
ordnance in emergencies.” It also revealed that “The deal allows Israel
access to a wider spectrum of military ordnance, and
the U.S. [is] considering which forms of military
supplies would be added to stores in Israel. Missiles,
armored vehicles, aerial ammunition and artillery
ordnance are already stockpiled in the country.” [76] The U.S., Israel and NATO are preparing for
momentous events in the Middle East. They will not be
peaceful ones. 1) Jerusalem Post, January 13, 2010
http://www.nato.int/strategic-concept/roadmap-strategic-concept.html 3) Thousand Deadly Threats: Third Millennium NATO,
Western Businesses
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/../thousand-deadly-threats-third-millennium-nato-western-businesses-collude-on-new-global-doctrine 4) Jerusalem Post, January 13, 2010
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/../nato-in-persian-gulf-from-third-world-war-to-istanbul 7) Jane’s Defence Weekly, May 10, 2005
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/../israel-forging-nato-missile-shield-rehearsing-war-with-iran 68) Arutz Sheva, November 3, 2009
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/../u-s-expands-global-missile-shield-into-middle-east-balkans Black Sea, Caucasus: U.S. Moves Missile Shield
South And East http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2009/../283 70) Reuters, October 22, 2009 |
Add Comments