Poland clouds NATO's nuanced Russia plan

By Robin Emmott and Wiktor Szary

Poland's President Andrzej Duda holds a news conference after meeting NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg (unseen) at the Alliance headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, January 18, 2016

Poland is putting its own spin on a nuanced NATO plan to deter Moscow in eastern Europe without stationing permanent troops on Russia's borders, prompting disquiet from allies including Britain, which needs Warsaw's help in EU reform negotiations.

Poland's defense minister on Thursday seized on Britain's announcement that it is sending troops for exercises in the country, telling local radio that London would station 1,000 military personnel in Poland from next year.

Britain's defense ministry declined to comment, but alliance diplomats say there are no such plans. Britain is providing nearly 1,000 troops for two NATO exercises later this year, as well as 1,000 personnel in four years' time, when Poland will lead the new NATO rapid-reaction spearhead force.

But the subtlety of the language used to promote the new NATO deterrent policy in the east is an opportunity for Poland's new conservative government. Warsaw, which is hosting the NATO summit in July, has called for a permanent NATO troop presence in the past and the new government has intensified those demands.

NATO's current compromise aims to have a "persistent"-rather than "permanent"-military in the east, based on a new network of eight small NATO outposts, more war games, and, if needed, a rapid response force, including air, maritime and special operations components of up to 40,000 personnel.

"Some people say 'permanent', others use 'persistent', other people use 'rotation'. In fact we are talking about the same thing," General Petr Pavel, chairman of NATO's military committee, told a news conference on Thursday.

The idea is to reassure the ex-Soviet countries in NATO that they are protected from the kind of annexation Russia orchestrated in February in 2014 in Crimea, while avoiding a return to the Cold War, when the United States had some 300,000 service personnel stationed in Europe.

NATO also wants to keep a 1997 promise to Moscow not to permanently station forces on the Russian border, thereby avoiding antagonizing a newly-assertive Russia and reach a peace settlement in eastern Ukraine, where NATO says Russia supports the rebels with weapons and troops.

Russia responded on Friday by saying it will form four new military divisions this year to strengthen its western and central regions because of the stepped-up exercises, which NATO set out in a calendar published on Thursday.

That is exactly the kind of reaction NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg wants to avoid, saying last year that he will not be "dragged into an arms race".

BREXIT LINK

Publicising NATO's message is a sensitive task, because eastern and Baltic NATO allies hope that a persistent NATO military presence in the east may one day become permanent, whereas NATO wants to avoid giving that impression.

Poland and the Baltic states prepared a joint position in May last year to lobby NATO for the permanent stationing of a brigade. All three former Soviet republics have Russian minorities and fear Kremlin moves to inflame tensions there after the pro-Russian insurrection in eastern Ukraine.

Polish President Andrzej Duda said last week at NATO he wanted any NATO troop presence to be "permanent to the greatest extent possible".

NATO allies such as Germany and Britain are against stationing forces permanently in the east. But Britain is also wary of publicly criticizing the Polish government as London seeks its support in negotiations aimed at keeping Britain in the European Union ahead of a referendum on "Brexit" expected in June.

Poland is understood to be open to compromise over British demands to limit the rights of EU migrants if London helps build up NATO's presence in central Europe.

NATO's main focus is on a 5,000-strong "spearhead" force, part of which can move within 48 hours.

But Poland's Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski said that was not enough. "A few years ago, it was assumed that (the eastern flank's security) could be guaranteed through a support mechanism, a spearhead," he said on Thursday at a joint news conference with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier in Warsaw.

"Today, this position is evolving and is starting to head in the direction of security guarantees being fulfilled through ... a presence of allied troops."

Emmott, Robert, and Wiktor Szary. "Poland clouds NATO's nuanced Russian plan." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 22 Jan. 2016. Web. 25 Jan. 2015.

Response
The issue with a volatile, powerful, nuclear regime such as the Russian Federation (or even its friend on the Korean Peninsula)is that nationalism and government becomes centralised to such a point that its neighbours can no longer count on it to behave rationally. Which is why, after the undeniably illegal annexation of Crimea, Putin's government continues to hold the entire Free World hostage. While Western democracies scramble to prevent another conflict lest it prove unpopular at home and hesitate to take any action that might be condemned as imperialist meddling, Russia continues to flex  its political, economic, and military might with relative ease—a troubling trend for its former satellites.

At least such is the case for Polish President Andrzej Duda, who, in a clear move to tip NATO's trembling hand, is seeking to compel the United Kingdom to commit additional troops to the region. It's understandable. Like many other formerly Soviet states, Poland is afraid, and in a very advantageous position when it comes to dealing with the UK (given the impending negotiations with the European Union).

Like myself, it would seem that the author of the article views Secretary-General Stoltenberg's Eastern European strategy with a critical eye—despite his early rhetoric emphasising NATO's need for an increased military capacity to counter the growing Russian threat, the slow probing of the Norwegian statesman is unlikely to do anything but delineate Putin's backyard.

In the end, though we'll have to wait and see how things play out, I have a hunch that this will turn out to be another display of Russian impunity that will leave the UK in a very sore spot indeed.

Effort to revive Afghanistan peace talks begins in Pakistan

By Asad Hashim and Tommy Wilkes

An Afghan policeman stands guard at the site of an explosion in Kabul, Afghanistan 

Delegates from Afghanistan, Pakistan, China and the United States held talks on Monday to resurrect a stalled Afghan peace process and end nearly 15 years of bloodshed, even as fighting with Taliban insurgents intensifies.

Senior officials from the four countries are meeting in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, to launch a process they hope will lead to negotiations with Taliban insurgents, who are fighting to re-impose their strict brand of Islamist rule and are not expected at Monday's talks.

The Pakistani prime minister's foreign affairs adviser, Sartaj Aziz, opened the meeting, saying the primary goal should be to convince the Taliban to come to the table and consider giving up violence.

"It is therefore important that preconditions are not attached to the start of the negotiation process. This, we argue, will be counterproductive," he said.

"The threat of use of military action against irreconcilables cannot precede the offer of talks to all the groups."

Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister Hekmat Karzai and Pakistani Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry were joined by Richard Olson, the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan and General Anthony Rock, the top U.S. defense representative in Pakistan, as well as China's special envoy on Afghanistan affairs, Deng Xijun.

Renewed peace efforts come amid spiraling violence in Afghanistan, with last year one of the bloodiest on record following the withdrawal of most foreign troops at the end of 2014.

In recent months the Taliban have won territory in the southern province of Helmand, briefly captured the northern city of Kunduz and launched a series of suicide bombs in the capital, underlining how hard Afghan government forces are finding it fighting on their own.

Peace efforts last year stalled after the Taliban announced that their founder, Mullah Mohammad Omar, had been dead for two years, throwing the militant group into disarray as rival factions fought for supremacy.

The Taliban, who were ousted in 2001, remain split on whether to take part in talks.

Taliban leader Mullah Akhtar Mansour's faction has shown signs of warming to the idea of eventually joining peace talks, and other groups are considering negotiating, senior members of the movement said last week.

But a splinter group headed by Mullah Mohammad Rasool Akhund, which rejects Mansour's authority, has dismissed any talks where a mediating role is played by Pakistan, which observers say holds significant sway among Taliban commanders holed up near its border with Afghanistan, or the United States or China.

"We have a very clear-cut stance about peace talks: all the foreign occupying forces would need to be withdrawn," Mullah Abdul Manan Niazi, Rasool's deputy, told Reuters on Monday.

"The issue is between the Afghans and only the Afghans can resolve it. We would not allow any third force to mediate between us."

Officials are keen to limit expectations of a quick breakthrough at Monday's talks.

Afghanistan has said the aim is to work out a road map for peace negotiations and a way of assessing if they remain on track.

From:
Hashim, Asad, and Tommy Wilkes. "Effort to revive Afghanistan peace talks begins in Pakistan." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 11 Jan. 2016. Web. 11 Jan. 2015.

Response
Let, us, for a moment, suspend discussion of whether or not the United States and its allies were right in invading Afghanistan, and instead, examine the results of nearly fourteen years of foreign military action. The Taliban remain as a fundamentalist as ever (perhaps even more so with this new splinter group). They have a seat at the table. And as various political and military groups scramble to fill the vacuum of power left by the exit of foreign military forces, the Afghan government finds itself facing one its greatest challenges yet.

Perhaps the recommencement of these peace talks should be hailed as a diplomatic victory. Yet to me, as well as the writer, the chances of their success seem extremely slim. The delegates in Islamabad will have to overcome a deep-seated resentment of Western interventionism, a new wave of religious violence, and still somehow manage to reconcile two governments that are virtually irreconcilable.

From the writer's comments about the difficulties faced by Afghan security forces, he seems to have the opinion that it was too soon for NATO to withdraw (and I agree with him). The decision, bound to be accompanied by considerable international repercussions, was influenced to too great an extent by U.S. politics at home, and now, a moderate Afghan government is paying the price for foreign powers jumping the gun.

Only the future will show whether or not the current government proves itself strong enough to weather the coming storm. In a position where it is difficult to receive help of any kind from its international allies, it will see itself hard-pressed to counter the growing insurgency in the months and years to come.

Sweden and Denmark Add Border Checks to Stem Flow of Migrants

By Dan Bilefsky

Security staff checked identifications at Kastrup train station outside Copenhagen on Monday

LONDON — The continued flow of people along Europe’s migration trail, from Turkey and Greece to the Balkans to Scandinavia, faced new impediments on Monday as two of the northernmost destinations further tightened border controls in response to political, economic and logistical pressures.

Sweden, once one of the most welcoming of nations for refugees, introduced new identity checks on Monday for travelers arriving from Denmark. Fearful that migrants who otherwise would pass through on their way to Sweden would now be unable to leave, Denmark swiftly moved to impose new controls on people traveling via its border with Germany.

The moves by the two Scandinavian countries represented another step in the erosion of the ideal of borderless travel across most of the European Union, amid rising concerns about the costs imposed by the tide of migration and fears that terrorists are seeking to enter Europe masquerading as refugees.

In recent months, Scandinavian countries, like other countries in Europe, have expressed increasing concern about the scale of migrants seeking to reach prosperous Northern European countries known for their generous welfare systems and for relatively welcoming attitudes.

The arrival of migrants — roughly one million reached Germany last year alone, though a significant minority were from other parts of Europe rather than from Syria, Iraq and other conflict-ridden nations — has gradually led European countries from south to north to seek to stem the tide.

Hungary built a razor-wire fence along its border to keep migrants out. Denmark has cut benefits to new arrivals by about 50 percent and has introduced tough language requirements for those seeking permanent residency. Finland has issued news releases in Arabic detailing additional restrictions, with the apparent aim of warning would-be asylum seekers that the country is not a paradise.

Under the temporary border controls introduced on Monday in Sweden, travelers to Sweden from Denmark will have to show valid identification with a photograph, like a passport, for the first time in more than half a century. On Monday travellers were bracing themselves for bottlenecks and long delays after the checks went into effect just after midnight on the Danish side of the Oresund Bridge, a major link between the Danish capital, Copenhagen, and the city of Malmo in southern Sweden, and a popular gateway for migrants seeking to enter Sweden.

The new border controls in Sweden are likely to present a hurdle to thousands of would-be asylum seekers, many of whom lack official documents. (The Oresund bridge has also gained a foothold in popular culture, being at the center of the hit Scandinavian crime television series “The Bridge,” which starts with detectives from the two countries teaming up to investigate the murder of a woman whose body is found on the structure.)

Travel between Denmark and Germany has not required a passport since 2001 under the Schengen Agreement, which permits borderless movement across much of the European Union. The system has already been teetering in recent months as even its staunchest supporters such as Germany have erected temporary controls.

German officials, while generally refraining from specific remarks about the Danish decision, expressed concern about the future of passport-free travel across Europe. An Interior Ministry spokesman, Johannes Dimroth, said the effect on migration north from Germany would “have to be watched very carefully.”

Martin Schaefer, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, said freedom of movement within the European Union was “perhaps one of the greatest achievements in the last 60 years.” He acknowledged, however, that the influx of migrants was putting enormous strains on the system.

The passage of migrants through Austria prompted Germany to impose its own border controls last year, and Steffen Seibert, a spokesman for Chancellor Angela Merkel, used the developments to once again press for a broader solution to the migrant crisis, in particular on the bloc’s external borders.

While the move by Sweden, which has a long tradition of welcoming refugees, was expected, Denmark’s was more sudden. The Danish prime minister, Lars Lokke Rasmussen, used his New Year’s Day address to warn that his government might impose controls at its border with Germany, and on Monday it followed through. In both countries, the issue has been influenced by the rise of populist, anti-immigration parties on the right.

The legislation mandating the Swedish controls is valid for three years, while the controls in Denmark are to last 10 days, with the possibility of extending them for an additional 20.

Mr. Rasmussen announced the new steps by his country hours after Sweden started checking train passengers arriving from Denmark.

“It is clear to all of us in Europe that we need an overall European solution,” he said. “The solution won’t be found at national borders between country A and country B.”

Torsten Albig, governor of the German state Schleswig-Holstein, which borders Denmark to the south, expressed dismay at the Danes’ move to tighten their shared border.

“This can hurt the good coexistence in the German-Danish border region and be especially hard on commuters,” Mr. Albig told the German news agency DPA.

Continue reading the main story

Carl Bildt, a former prime minister and foreign minister of Sweden, condemned the measures introduced by his country, writing on Twitter that it was “a dark day for our Nordic region.”

Citizens on either side of the border between Germany and Denmark have long had ties with one another and have moved freely for the last 15 years.

Denmark stopped all train traffic from Germany and closed its main highway for several days after Sept. 9, when thousands of refugees sought to enter the country, most destined for Sweden.

David Brax, a researcher of hate crimes at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, said the country’s center-left minority government had justified the measures on the grounds that its system for processing migrants and refugees could no longer cope with the influx.

But he said a backlash against migration was also gaining force in Sweden at a time when a populist far-right anti-immigrant party was gaining ground and when public sentiment against migrants was hardening in some quarters.

“Rights groups and those on the left are very upset by the measures,” he said in an interview. “There is a deep polarization on migration in Sweden. Some people see it as a duty to help as many migrants as we can. But others argue that Sweden, in the wake of terrorist attacks in Paris and California, must be very vigilant, secure its borders and prevent terrorists pretending to be migrants from entering.”

Tensions over migration in Sweden were stoked over the summer when a woman and her son were stabbed to death at an Ikea in Vasteras, and an Eritrean whose asylum request had been denied was charged with the crime. Several refugee centers in the country have been set on fire in recent months.

The far right in Sweden, as elsewhere in Europe, has been exploiting fears about immigration to draw support. The Sweden Democrats, a far-right anti-immigrant party, won almost 13 percent of the vote in a 2014 general election, and recent polls show it gaining in strength. But the center-left minority government and the opposition have both avoided joining forces with the party, mitigating its influence.

Last year, more than one million refugees and migrants fled to Europe by sea or land, many of them undertaking perilous journeys on rickety boats organized by human traffickers. At least 3,735 have drowned.

From:

Bilefsky, Dan. "Sweden and Denmark Add Border Checks to Stem Flow of Migrants." The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 4 Jan. 2016. Web. 4 Jan. 2016.

Response

As a newspaper with oft liberal leanings, the New York Times' reporting on the newest development of Europe's migrant crisis is likely to demonstrate a more favourable disposition towards the plight of immigrants. Indeed, the structure of Bilefsky's writing, interspersed with repeated mention of the value of unrestricted travel and the hardships faced by immigrants, subtly pins the new turn of events on the fear-fuels rise of xenophobic far-right parties.

In any case, the major policy change in the Scandinavian countries demonstrates a severe lack of a coordinated, "overall European solution." Despite Germany's strong leadership throughout the crisis, the asymmetric distribution of the socioeconomic burdens faced by the European states has resulted in extreme measures by European Union members who are seeking to stem the tide of migrants before it reaches their doorsteps.