HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=11042002-054515-7284r

NATO must modernize, says Burns 
By Christian Bourge
UPI Think Tank Correspondent
>From the Think Tanks & Research Desk
Published 4/11/2002 6:05 PM

-"We are facing a widening capabilities gap," said
Burns, adding that the $48 million in additional
military spending in 2002 that went beyond the
President George W. Bush's original budget request
actually exceeds the total combined defense spending
of 14 of NATO's member nations.
"We know that defense spending sometimes represents a
choice of having to decide between guns and butter,
but we are in a situation where we face severe
challenges," he said. 


WASHINGTON, April 11 (UPI) -- Despite continued
criticisms that NATO has outlived its usefulness since
the fall of the Soviet Union, Nicholas Burns, the U.S.
ambassador to NATO, said Thursday in a speech at a
Washington think tank that the defense organization
still has a vital role in ensuring the peace and
stability of its member nations.

"NATO is first and foremost the indispensable bridge
between North America and Europe," said Burns at the
Center for Transnational Relations at the Johns
Hopkins University School for Advanced International
Studies. "NATO is also our vital insurance policy."

His talk focused on the many challenges NATO faces
this year as it approaches its November 2002 summit
meeting in Prague. Among these are which new member
nations should be admitted, out of the nine countries
that are up for membership -- Albania, Bulgaria,
Estonia, Croatia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Latvia, Romania
and Macedonia -- and how NATO should deal with the new
geopolitical role of Russia. 

Beyond this, Burns said that the key portion of the
U.S. agenda is the effort to enhance the ability of
the member nations to work together to fight worldwide
terrorism. He said that in order to best address the
terrorism issue, member countries need to add new
capacities for fighting the problem, and to look into
new initiatives beyond NATO, aimed at attacking
terrorism.

The top issue from the Bush administration's
perspective, he said, is the need for NATO countries
to invest in new military technologies in order to
upgrade their forces to function in the 21st century.
This includes investments in precision-guided
munitions, advanced communications systems and other
critical technologies, as well the development of
individual strategic operations forces that can
respond quickly to threats. 

"We are facing a widening capabilities gap," said
Burns, adding that the $48 million in additional
military spending in 2002 that went beyond the
President George W. Bush's original budget request
actually exceeds the total combined defense spending
of 14 of NATO's member nations.

"We know that defense spending sometimes represents a
choice of having to decide between guns and butter,
but we are in a situation where we face severe
challenges," he said. "Can we stand by and not spend
the money necessary to defend against those attacks
and deter them?"

Burns said the U.S. government is currently in talks
with its European allies on this subject, and is also
discussing the need for some of them to convert their
forces, now focused on territorial defense, into
forces that are easily deployable and able to quickly
respond to more immediate threats.

Before his speech, Burns -- a 1980 alumnus of SAIS--
was awarded the school's Woodrow Wilson award for
distinguished government service. 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

---------------------------
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9617B
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

Reply via email to