Belarus honor guards in front of new Russian Mi-8mtv-5 helicopters

Comments 8

防止北约-俄罗斯局势升级

Dec 16, 2016 John McColl

布鲁塞尔——美国当选总统唐纳德·特朗普在竞选期间对北约联盟表示怀疑后，现在正开始制定一项可能对欧洲危险的安全局势产生深远影响的外交政策。美国可能在北约和俄罗斯关系达到历史低点时脱离联盟。随着双方军事活动的显著增加，欧洲需要大胆的新理念来管理未来可能的交锋。

由于过去三年俄罗斯沿北约边境不断开展军事活动，如果考虑到不断扩大的可能导致紧张局势升级的事故或误判风险，树立新思维的重要性也不断升级。可能导致生命损失的遭遇战包括波罗的海和黑海事件，比方说战斗机高速掠过军舰或对侦察机的积极拦截。2015年11月土耳其在叙土边界击落一架俄罗斯战斗机使得这种可能性变得非常真实。

最近欧洲领导力网络（ELN）的一份报告指出，尽管北约各成员国和俄罗斯之间存在双边事件管理协议，但保障范围的缺口却依然存在。因为彼此缺乏协调且没有适当考虑包括无人机等无人驾驶飞行器的民用活动或现代技术，现有协议的作用十分有限。

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

Registration is quick and easy and requires only your email address. If you already have an account with us, please log in. Or subscribe now for unlimited access.

Featured

What’s Been Stopping the Left?

Apr 10, 2018 Dani Rodrik
Political Machismo

Apr 10, 2018 Ian Buruma
Will China Really Supplant US Economic Hegemony?

Apr 2, 2018 Kenneth Rogoff
Should Tech Companies Be More Tightly Regulated?

Mar 30, 2018 Simon Johnson
Liberal World Order, R.I.P.

Mar 21, 2018 Richard N. Haass

0 Comments on this paragraph, 10 in all 10 Comments on this article

Valerie Mackenzie Dec 20, 2016

Lots of Russian trolls here.
Mauricio Duran-Loriga Dec 20, 2016

NATO is the last barbarous relic of an ancient past where any kind of bilateral/multilateral conflict between nations was dealt through war.
NATO and Warsaw Pact were counterbalancing powers until Warsaw Pact dissolved as its Russian main financier went bust by 1991.
So what is Nato needed for? Basically NAto pours billions of public money into a select bunch of pockets. All the while pretending to protect the world from imaginary enemies that never show up.
The hilarious thing is that both the two major military operations in Nato's history (Bosnia and Kosovo bombings) were opposed by UN Security Council. The world police breaching the international laws it was supposed to protect.
If Europeans ever believed NATO would have been a real buffer with live ammunition against hypothetical Warsaw Pact aggression, that means European folly is just about endless.
Any mainstream parroted NATO-Russian tension would be, again, a source of pulling billions from the unsuspecting herd into the usual suspect's pockets.
Nato will disappear over time. By lack of funding. It's a question of when, not if.
Humans have this obsession of surrounding themselves of countless and expensive tools for ages, until their proven uselessness outweighs their rusty appearance by far.
t
Allan Bleiken Dec 20, 2016

NATO SHOULD BE ASHAMED

Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, NATO has embarked upon a massive and aggressive expansion program. After promising Gorbachev that NATO would not expand eastward if Eastern Germany was allowed to be part of a unified Germany, it promptly began a rapid expansion into the former Soviet Union countries.

Then to it's disgrace, the NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION became involved in Middle East wars and the war in Afghanistan. In large measure, NATO has assumed a colonial mentality of expansion and aggression.

It accuses Russia of being a military threat to NATO nations, yet it has a military budget more than 12 times greater than that of Russia. Not satisfied with that, it is being prompted by the US to significantly expand its military budget. Who will it conquer next?

All of this is being done at a time when the financial status of Europe is fragile and at risk.

Shame, shame, shame.
Michael Public Dec 19, 2016

Fresh thinking is needed. But not the kind you have in mind. Why even bother fighting with Russia? What do you have to gain? A few square kilometres of meaningless land in Ukraine? What do you have to lose? Everything - your life - your families lives - your country - the planet. Even a amateur gambler knows this 'confronting Russia' as you suggest must happen is a bad bet.
Henk Crop Dec 17, 2016

Fresh thinking is required indeed. I agree with your ideas to reduce risks.
What I miss however in the discussions on NATO-Russia relations is the lack of strategic thinking. Which hampers finding solutions on the operational level.
On the strategic level Russia and Europe are potentially ideal partners. Russia the raw materials and Europe food en commercial products. The US would also benefit if it would join such a partnership.
Important factor is also that the populations of Europe and Russia are declining.
All three parties are faced with middle-east countries which seem to be at war and in chaos forever. Exporting refugees and islam terror.
On the strategic level there is ample reason for the US, Europe and Russia to work closer together.
That does not mean that there are currently not several issues of conflict.
A chess player always tries to understand his opponent.
If I were Russian I would see that: the NATO/the EU moved ever closer to its border, Russai runned the risk of the Krim becoming a NATO base, Ukraine is being drawn into the EU, in Syria the West wanted to oust Bashir al-Assad overlooking that Russia has a longtime relations with Syria. On top of that I heard mr. Obama irretate Russia by claiming it is just a regional power.
So I am not surprised that lately we have again Russian bombers patrolling over the North Sea ( that is 150 km from my home) and Russian missiles close to Berlin.
Countries have to protect their territory but I am not convinced that the west is on the right track.
I truly hope that mr. Trump, as a successful business man, will provide the fresh thinking needed to achieve better solutions for us all.
William Wallace Dec 16, 2016

Most timely. Tweet a summary to Trump.
Rik Rijs Dec 16, 2016

Russia's military activities? It's Angela Merkel who wants Georgia and Ukraine as NATO and EU members. It's the Germans who want to topple the regime in Belarussia. Merkel supports corrupt politicians in Ukraine and Georgia to reach that goal. She does it with political means while Hitlet tried it with war. Is nobody seeing the fact that the Germans don't give up their dream of hegemony over Europe? Germany is thereby violating a 1994 agreement with Russia after the break up of the Sovjet Union. EU citizens don't want those corrupt regimes/countries to become EU members. Germany doesn't care about what the people think. Don't be surprised when EU citizens vote 'populist'. They don't want a new German supremacy era. The Brexit could have followers.
- Ga Steli Dec 17, 2016
  
  Have you considered the post-WWII behavior of Russia? Beside the Gorbachev decision to free its satellite states from its hegemony, except in this instance, when has Russia, whether in pre- & post-soviet era, ever done anything to advance free expression, and respect for minority rights, self-determination and free elections in other countries?
- Curtis Carpenter Dec 16, 2016
  
  Have you considered what Germany has at stake in its relations with Russia and the former Warsaw Pact states? It's worth looking at, and may provide you with a deeper understanding of the German position on a variety of issues (not least energy).
Armin Schmidt Dec 16, 2016

It is hard for me to follow the thinking, as such considerations are seldom found in newspapers.
I very much agree on the principle of communication in case of military friction, as it seems to be a part of society, that also may have good use for the rule-of-thumb: "Subgroup liberation demands fairness and mutual compensation."

http://prosyn.org/r4hm3ya/zh;

Log in/Register

防止北约-俄罗斯局势升级

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

Featured

What’s Been Stopping the Left?

Political Machismo

Will China Really Supplant US Economic Hegemony?

Should Tech Companies Be More Tightly Regulated?

Liberal World Order, R.I.P.

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

A Tale of Two Realities

Who Cares About Big Tech’s Displaced Workers?

Germany’s Populist Temptation

The West’s Crisis of Confidence

No Blank Check for Development Banks

Missile Strikes Are Not a Syria Strategy

The “Next Eleven” and the World Economy

Should We Really Care About Inequality?