NB: there are now 29 NATO members!!! Montenegro joined in 2017, despite fierce Russian diplomatic pressure (and accusations of an attempted coup against the pro-Western PM)!!!
Monday, 31 January 2022
CCEA Unit 2 info packs
Sunday, 30 January 2022
Monday, 27 December 2021
UN keeps the peace in space! China USA tensions
(Guardian)
China recently complained that the US was failing to keep to the UN-regulated protocols on space safety after its space station twice this year had to take evasive manoeuvres to avoid Elon Musk satellites. His company SpaceX has launched 1600 and has permission from the US government to launch 12000 more!
The UN has a Committee on the Safe Uses of Outer Space. The US has likewise had to take action to avoid military satellites launched by China.
Tuesday, 14 December 2021
UN attempt to link global warming and conflict blocked by Russia
Meantime ... France is attempting to win agreement to end the power of veto over cases of mass slaughter (Guardian) ... but surely none of Russia, China or the US - all tied to or supporters of regimes accused of this - will agree? Over 100 nations have pledged support for the proposal, presented with Mexico. Conventionally, the UK can be expected to toe the line the US demands.
Thursday, 9 December 2021
NATO basics and news
TBC
RUSSIA UKRAINE INVASION THREAT HAS EASTERN EUROPE NATO MEMBERS NERVOUS OF US-RUSSIA DEAL
Biden has warned Russia of consequences for any such invasion and promised to move in troops and equipment if this happens, but few think the US would directly engage in military action. And this makes Eastern European members nervous as they think Russia may continue to push former USSR territories.
This is where NATO diplomacy is as important as military might, and that can include pressure on EU states to isolate Russia economically - as is the case with strong US diplomacy to push Germany and France to step back from agreeing to a new Russian gas pipeline. See Guardian article:
Officials in Poland and other eastern and central Nato countries have privately bristled at Biden’s description of seeking an “accommodation” with Russia, worrying that any trade-off could increase the danger they face from an expansionist Russia.
“Russia must not be given any say in how Nato organises the defence of its territory” or in who can join the military alliance, said the Estonian prime minister, Kaja Kallas, in public remarks on Thursday. “What is most alarming is Russia’s desire to turn Europe into spheres of influence. It is unacceptable and morally indefensible, and Russia must be made aware of that in clear terms.”
PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE - THREAT TO RUSSIA?
This is covered in the CCEA exam pack, but its not very clearly expressed. Sources I've used here: Nato's own guide; BBC; Wiki. From the BBC:
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Nato embarked on a series of steps designed to build new relationships with former Warsaw Pact countries and particularly with Russia, which was profoundly suspicious of the alliance's plans to expand eastwards.
In 1994 Nato offered former Warsaw Pact members limited associations in the form of the Partnership for Peace programme, allowing them to participate in information sharing, joint exercises and peacekeeping operations.
But this simply appeared to confirm Russian fears that Nato posed a creeping threat to its security.
The Nato-Russia Permanent Joint Council was established in May 1997 to give Russia a consultative role in discussion of matters of mutual interest. While Moscow was given a voice, it rarely felt that it was really listened to.
Russia's fears intensified when in 1999 the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland became the first former Soviet bloc states to join Nato, bringing the alliance's borders 400 miles closer to the Russian frontier.
The PfP was launched at a 1994 Nato summit after a push by US President Clinton to bring many former Soviet states within the Nato fold. The concept was (and is) that this operates a little like the EU membership candidacy scheme: it might lead those member states to future membership of Nato. The Wiki table below shows just how significant this programme has been.
It has proven highly controversial with Russia - leading to accusations that they tried to engineer a coup in Montenegro to switch its affiliation with the Western powers back to Russia. Ukraine is also an original PfP member which of course, as I type in Dec 2021, is under threat of Russian invasion with Russia also directly warning the West of dire consequences if Ukraine becomes a full Nato member.
Consider that Belarus is still also a PfP member - this was, and is, a highly assertive move by Nato to spread its membership and lock former-Soviet nations into an alliance that is essentially intended to counter Russian (formerly Soviet) power and expansion.
...
Monday, 22 November 2021
NATO CASE STUDY: KOSOVO success
2008 headline after Kosovo declared independence:
SOME KEY MOMENTS
THE BUILD-UP TO CONFLICT
1987: future Serb leader Slobodan Milosevic rallies Kosovo Serbs, a key step in his rise to power in Yuglosalvia; as President he stripped Kosovo of its regional autonomy under the constitution
1990: before Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia declared independence in 1991 it was Albanian Kosovo leaders who were the 1st to declare independence from Yugoslavia. 100,000 ethnic Albanian workers were worked, leading to a general strike. Conflict brewed as a new president (Rugova) was elected for the self-proclaimed republic
1995: The KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) publicly announce their formation, growing out of earlier independence groups. They reacted against the perceived weakness of President Rugova and the absence of any concessions in the 1995 Dayton Accords; they declare their aim to militarily resist Serbian rule in 1997.
ARMED CONFLICT BEGINS: SWIFT, DECISIVE NATO AIRSTRIKES - BUT CIVILIAN AREAS BOMBED
1998, March: Serbia launches a military crackdown on Kosovo rebels, leading to 1000s of ethnic Albanians being forced out of their homes by militias and the Serbian army (still officially the Yugoslav army). Around 2,000 Kosovan civilians + KLA combatants killed.
1998, September: Nato gives President Milosevic an ultimatum: cease the attacks or face retribution
1999, March: a year after the armed conflict began, Nato launches 78 days of airstrikes against Belgrade, terming this a "humanitarian war". 1000s of ethnic Albanian refugees tell horror stories of suffering at the hands of Serb forces/militias.
1999, June: 'President Milosevic agrees to withdraw troops from Kosovo. UN sets up a Kosovo Peace Implementation Force (Kfor) and Nato forces arrive in the province. The KLA agrees to disarm. Serb civilians flee revenge attacks.' (BBC)
The war ended with the Kumanovo Treaty, with Yugoslav and Serb forces agreeing to withdraw from Kosovo to make way for an international presence
After the war, a list was compiled which documented that over 13,500 people were killed or went missing during the two year conflict. The Yugoslav and Serb forces caused the displacement of between 1.2 million to 1.45 million Kosovo Albanians
The NATO bombing campaign has remained controversial. It did not gain the approval of the UN Security Council and it caused at least 488 Yugoslav civilian deaths, including substantial numbers of Kosovar refugees. (Wiki)
 |
| NATO description of KFOR |
A VERY UNEASY PEACE - WITH FRESH OUTBREAKS OF VIOLENCE. UN FORCES
2004 March - Nineteen people are killed in the worst clashes between Serbs and ethnic Albanians since 1999. The violence started in the divided town of Mitrovica.2004 October - President Rugova's pro-independence Democratic League tops poll in general election, winning 47 seats in 120-seat parliament. Poll is boycotted by Serbs.
2004 December - Parliament re-elects President Rugova and elects former rebel commander Ramush Haradinaj as prime minister. Mr Haradinaj's party had entered into a coalition with the president's Democratic League.
2005 March - Mr Haradinaj indicted to face UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague, resigns as prime minister. [BBC]
INDEPENDENCE DECLARED; CONFLICT OVER RECOGNITION, BUT MUTUAL ASPIRATION TO JOIN EU. EU TAKES OVER UN ROLE
2008 Following Vienna 2006, the 1st direct talks since 1999, Kosovo declares independence - swiftly recognised by the US and UN but not Russia or Serbia. I experienced not so long after being turned away at the Serb border for having a Kosovo stamp in my passport! BBC:
2008 June - A new constitution transfers power to majority ethnic Albanian government after nine years of UN rule. Kosovo Serbs set up their own rival assembly in Mitrovica.
2008 December - European Union mission (Eulex) takes over police, justice and customs services from the UN. Serbia accepts the EU mission.
2009 January - New multi-ethnic Kosovo Security Force launched under Nato supervision, replacing a unit dominated by veterans of independence campaign against Serbia.
2012 September - The group of 23 EU countries, the US and Turkey overseeing Kosovo since 2008 end its supervisory role over the government, although Nato-led peacekeepers and EU rule-of-law monitors remain.
2013 April - Kosovo and Serbia reach a landmark agreement on normalising relations that grants a high degree of autonomy to Serb-majority areas in northern, while both sides agree not to block each other's efforts to seek EU membership.
2018 Talks over landswap with Serbia - initially supported by EU, but they reverse once the US makes its opposition clear. This remains a live possibility today, with splits in Nato over whether this is a good idea. Kosovo remains unstable with Kosovo Serbs, similarly to Bosnian Serbs, largely refusing to recognise or engage with the federal government.
STARTER ARTICLES
BBC timeline (+ alternate version)
BBC (video): the war that won't end
BBC Newsbeat: NATO explained in pictures
BalkanInsight: 78 days of terror
NATO's own guide
IrishTimes: example of sceptical Western media from 1999
Britannica: encyclopedia entry
Euronews: Serbia/Kosovo relations explained
Looooong read: Was NATO’s decision to militarily intervene in the Kosovo War a ‘last resort’?
VIDEOS
This is a pretty good amateur video explaining the context of the breakup of Yugoslavia and outbreak of multiple wars, though the sound quality isn't great (4:58, 2015).
You can find lots of useful vids; not a bad idea when revising to try a video you haven't watched before.
A simple YouTube search (you can also try looking for BBC or C4 News features)
Most of these sources will mainly uncritically follow the line that the NATO action was legitimate and proportionate, and for exam purposes this is a case study of NATO success. There is a critique though, that NATO targeted civilian infrastructure as well as military, bombing a modern European capital city. This short Spanish video (subtitled) quotes a Serbian media worker beside a headstone commemorating his fellow workers killed by a NATO bomb hitting a media centre.
There are some unlikely features out there too - like ex-soldier now terrible solo singer James "You're Beautiful" Blunt returning to see Kosovo. There are alternate news sources like this Turkish one too, plus longer docs like this 30min one from 1999.
THE ECONOMIST: HOW DID KOSOVO BECOME A COUNTRY? 7:52 (2018)
The final point in this vid is interesting: both Serbia and Kosovo aspire to EU membership; impossible if continued hostility from Serbia continues - so could this bring about a more settled peace? The video highlights that many Kosovans (just as in Bosnia) simply reject the Kosovo identity, perceiving themselves still as simply Serbian.
NATO: HOW KFOR DEVELOPED (REFLECTS ON 20 YEARS, ESPECIALLY POST-WAR REBUILDING ROLE) 9:27 (2019)
Obviously not an objective source! Useful detail nonetheless.BBC: KOSOVO WAR, THE CONFLICT THAT WON'T GO AWAY 5:31 (2019)
As noted in the Economist video above, this conflict may have moved past direct military confrontation, but tension and conflict over borders and national identity remains very strong - as seen in some flashpoint sporting events.
You can get a sense of how the Western media portrayed the conflict with this 1999 appeal for the UK public to donate aid to Kosovo, fronted by a BBC journalist.
BBC: GROWING UP IN KOSOVO I'VE NEVER MET A SERBIAN 8:19 (2019)
We've discussed the sectarian schooling in Northern Ireland, and the 'peace walls' that continue to divide many communities decades after the ceasefires and GFA. This video explores the reality of a sharply ethnically divided European state, whose very existence is still contested by Serbia, Russia and more.
COULD THE SERBIA/KOSOVO BORDERS CHANGE AGAIN (PEACEFULLY)? LAND-SWAP DISCUSSIONS 1:30, BBC 2018
The EU initially signalled they were in favour of this, but changed tack after the US expressed opposition. No dialogue in this video, just titles.
...
Sunday, 21 November 2021
NATO CASE STUDY: AFGHANISTAN failure
STARTER LINKS:
BBC explainer: costs of the war
BBC Afghanistan archive
Guardian Afghanistan archive
A long read: Belfer
US DRONE STRIKE THAT KILLED 7 CHILDREN WON’T BE PUNISHED (Guardian)
'No US troops or officials will face disciplinary action for a drone strike in Kabul in August that killed 10 Afghan civilians, including seven children, the Pentagon said’
How US bombings, killings radicalised many Afghans (Guardian)
'“The insurgency was not inevitable. There was a good chance for peace in 2001. Everyone, including the Taliban accepted they had been defeated. But the US and their Afghan allies persecuted and marginalised those who’d lost the war, not just Taliban but tribal and factional rivals of those who had seized power,” said Kate Clark, co-director of the Afghanistan Analysts Network.'
Afghanistan papers reveal US public were misled about unwinnable war (Guardian Dec 2019)
Afghanistan papers reveal US public were misled about unwinnable war (Guardian Dec 2019)
Interviews with key insiders reveal damning verdict on conflict that cost 2,300 US lives
Snippet:
Hundreds of confidential interviews with key figures involved in prosecuting the 18-year US war in Afghanistan have revealed that the US public has been consistently misled about an unwinnable conflict.
Transcripts of the interviews, published by the Washington Post after a three-year legal battle, were collected for a Lessons Learned project by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (Sigar), a federal agency whose main task is eliminating corruption and inefficiency in the US war effort.
The 2,000 pages of documents reveal the bleak and unvarnished views of many insiders in a war that has cost $1tn (£760bn) and killed more than 2,300 US servicemen and women, with more than 20,000 injured. Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians have died in the conflict.
...
BBC April 2021:
The Taliban believe victory is theirs. Sitting over a cup of green tea, Haji Hekmat proclaims, "we have won the war and America has lost". The decision by US President Joe Biden to delay the withdrawal of remaining US forces to September, meaning they will remain in the country past the 1 May deadline agreed last year, has sparked a sharp reaction from the Taliban's political leadership. Nonetheless, momentum seems to be with the militants.
For the past year, there has been an apparent contradiction in the Taliban's "jihad". They stopped attacks on international forces following the signing of an agreement with the US, but continued to fight with the Afghan government. Haji Hekmat, though, insists there is no contradiction. "We want an Islamic government ruled by the Sharia. We will continue our jihad until they accept our demands."
On whether or not the Taliban would be willing to share power with other Afghan political factions, Haji Hekmat defers to the group's political leadership in Qatar. "Whatever they decide we will accept," he repeatedly says.
The Taliban don't see themselves as a mere rebel group, but as a government-in-waiting. They refer to themselves as the "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan," the name they used when in power from 1996 until being overthrown in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.
Now, they have a sophisticated "shadow" structure, with officials in charge of overseeing everyday services in the areas they control.
Airpower, particularly that provided by the Americans, has been crucial over the years in holding back the Taliban's advance. The US already drastically cut back its military operations after signing an agreement with the Taliban last year, and many fear that following their withdrawal the Taliban will be placed to launch a military takeover of the country.
Haji Hekmat derides the Afghan government, or "Kabul administration" as the Taliban refer to it, as corrupt and un-Islamic. It's hard to see how men like him will reconcile with others in the country, unless it's on their own terms.
"This is jihad," he says, "it is worship. We don't do it for power but for Allah and His law. To bring Sharia to this country. Whoever stands against us we will fight against them."
Selected quotes:
The UK is to "drawdown" the number of troops in Afghanistan from next month, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace has said.
Confirming the planned departure of forces, Mr Wallace also warned any attacks on existing troops would be "met with a forceful response".
The UK military has been in Afghanistan since 2001, with more than 450 British troops dying during the conflict with the Taliban and fighters from al-Qaeda.
The US has said it will withdraw all forces by 11 September.
And Nato confirmed allies would begin withdrawing troops from 1 May.
The last UK combat troops left in 2014, but about 750 remain as part of the Nato mission to train Afghan forces.
US President Joe Biden has announced that American troops will leave Afghanistan by 11 September, saying it was "time to end America's longest war".
That would coincide with the 20th anniversary of the terror attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in the US in 2001.
Mr Biden said while the US "will not stay involved in Afghanistan militarily", its "diplomatic and humanitarian work" would continue.
Our defence correspondent Jonathan Beale says the UK, like most Nato allies, relies on the US's infrastructure, logistics and support in Afghanistan.
The US has some 2,500 troops in the country as part of a 9,600-strong Nato mission.
At the height of the war, Nato had more than 130,000 troops from 50 nations in Afghanistan. The UK had 9,500 personnel and 137 bases in Helmand province alone.
The speaker of the Afghan parliament, Mir Rahman Rahmani, has warned the withdrawal of foreign forces in the current circumstances will lead to civil war.
In February 2020, the US and the Taliban agreed a deal that would see the US and Nato allies withdraw all troops within 14 months if the Taliban upheld its promises, including not allowing al-Qaeda or other militants to operate in areas it controlled and proceeding with national peace talks.
Although the group stopped attacks on international forces as part of the agreement, it has continued to fight the Afghan government.
Last month, the Taliban threatened to resume hostilities against foreign troops still in the country on 1 May.
MORE BBC LINKS:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)