Bloomberg: NATO Struggles to Meet Spending Goals as It Weighs Higher Target
(Bloomberg) -- NATO countries may agree as soon as this summer to spend at least 2% of their economic output on defense, a slight shift from the alliance’s 10-year-old pledge to “move toward the 2% guideline.”
North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg and the alliance’s defense ministers will begin discussing the target when they meet in Brussels for two days starting on Tuesday, with the aim to agree on a revision by the next NATO summit in Vilnius in July.
NATO countries have pledged to spend more on defense following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last year, but many nations — including Luxembourg, Canada and Italy — are still struggling to comply with the old guideline. That makes it hard for NATO to significantly strengthen the target, which may lead allies instead to agree to a 2% floor, current and former officials and diplomats say.
Read more ....
Update: NATO eyes fighting two wars – Bloomberg (RT).
WNU Editor: The key part of the Bloomberg article is this ....
.... The classified guidance will plan ways for NATO to simultaneously engage in a high-intensity so-called Article 5 conflict, where allies would have to defend each other, as well as an out out-of-area, non-Article 5 event at the same time, people familiar with the matter said. Article 5 is NATO’s mutual defense clause.
4 comments:
Nato should stick to doing what they have been doing for decades ie:Nothing
Put more plainly: we need to be prepared for peer conflict with China, but we don’t want to give up our regime change hobbies.
Oh jesus.. They cant even agree on the energy crisis but they're imagining they can somehow be able to handle TWO wars at the same time!? With whom!? What!? Where!?
But it seems like the Bloomberg is just saying NATO should not only be able to defend but also be offensive at the same time. Lets just hope they dont fuck up the first part before making everyone march to Russia Napoleon-style.
"Nato should stick to doing what they have been doing for decades ie:Nothing"
NATO stuck together long enough to thwart the Kremlin Kleptocrats during the Cold War to thwart their cupidity.
There is a true story of a knight, who refused battle. He would camp across the river form the enemy every night. The enemy would wake up and intend to cross the river and fight, but the knight and his army were gone. The enemy would find the knight' army later in the day. they would set camp only to wake up the next morning to find the knight gone. this was kept up until the was no more time to campaign for the season.
The knight had kept an army in being intact. He had satisfied the goal for his army, prevent the siege of cities and the pillaging of the surrounding area. This was southern France BTW.
Nothing in Sun Tzu or any other book say you have to equal or outnumber your enemy to win or be a credible deterrent. You can have a smaller army and be a credible deterrent. you may take increased risk.
Although if it pans out the smaller army gives you the opportunity to invest elsewhere for economic development. The cupid ones never learned about opportunity cost, TBF neither did a lot of socialist scum in the West did either.
Post a Comment