[ad_1]
“A very important stage”
“It just came to our attention then. It happened. I am pleased to say that this is a very important stage and now no less important is the task of implementing the plans, which will require a lot of work from our military and defense planners. However, this is a really important stage and a consensus has been reached. I contacted a colleague in Turkey yesterday and thanked him for this decision. I think this is a beautiful example of our cooperation, “said Foreign Minister Linas Linkevičius, Delfi, adding that the “political consensus” was reached last year at a meeting of NATO leaders in London.
Indeed, in 2019. At a meeting of NATO leaders in London in early December, the Baltic and Polish leaders met with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and welcomed the announcement that the Turks would no longer block defense plans. After all, as the meeting approached, the information reached the public that Turkey was stubbornly blocking them.
However, less than a week after the London meeting, Turkish officials again changed their minds and said they would continue to block NATO’s eastern flank defense plans until Turkey received a similar plan (more precisely, until the defense plan for NATO’s southern flank will be updated) and until NATO countries agree with the Syrian Kurds. YPG (Allied United States) organization as a terrorist organization.
American merit?
In this same situation, the Baltic and Polish defense plans were put in the closet (they were returned to the military to “improve”), and the next coronavirus epidemic pushed the issue even further.
Plans for a gradual response were only recalled in mid-June, on the eve of the NATO Defense Ministers meeting. The German news agency DPA reported that Turkey continues to block defense plans due to a refusal to recognize the Kurdish YPG as a terrorist organization.
The Turkish media, meanwhile, reported that NATO had prepared / updated a defense plan for the southern flank and planned to include the YPG and the associated Kurdish separatist organization, the PKK, in the threats. But the United States, whose allies in Syria are YPG, and several other NATO countries are said to reject it.
Officially, neither NATO nor the representatives of Turkey or Lithuania commented on this information. Both diplomats (unofficial) and experts repeated the same thing: “It is a game of great countries.”
Linas Linkevičius
But the day before the NATO ministerial meeting, the Permanent Representative of the United States, NATO Ambassador, Kay Bailey Hutchison, brought a little more clarity.
“We are really very interested in the existence of phased response plans for the Baltic States and Poland. And they will be implemented. (…) Planning for the Baltic States continues and I hope we are very close to an agreement, in some few hours or days, ”the United States ambassador answered the question about Delfi during a remote press conference.
These optimistic words from the American diplomat surprised even Lithuanian diplomats, although they said that the issue of NATO defense plans was always on their agenda.
Finally, as we can see now, the problem in question was taken out of the closet. How much has the United States contributed to this? Foreign Minister L. Linkevičius does not want to speculate.
“I will not go into details: neither about the composition of the plans, nor about this process. It is subtle enough and certainly not public,” said the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lithuania, adding: “All decisions in NATO, already whether operational, military or financial, are taken by consensus. This is the rule and is followed in a very sacred way. Of course, on the one hand, it takes time, but on the other hand, it provides credibility, because then everyone implements this decision, without exception ”.
According to Deutsche Welle, phased response plans are an essential element of NATO’s strategy to stop Russia. They detail how the Allies will be supported in the event of an attack or crisis (such as the NATO Rapid Reaction Force operation). They also seem to allow us to return to discussions about increasing Alliance forces in the Baltic States. The decision to create these plans was made in 2015, a year after Russia illegally annexed the Crimean peninsula in Ukraine.
More and more disagreements
On the basis of “content secrecy”, the Minister also did not respond if Turkey’s requirements had been met. He only reiterated that Turkey has nothing “personal” against Lithuania.
“From the beginning, it has been said that the position of the Turks is not directed against us or against the Baltic countries.” They have their own interests and that is understandable. And they really defend them with a lot, a lot of strength, persistence and principles. This is no exception, “said L. Linkevičius.
If we were to name the most “troubled” NATO member in recent days, it would probably be Turkey. It has taken military action in Syria and Libya, which is causing dissatisfaction among many other members of the Alliance. There has been a recent conflict between the Turkish and French navies. Serious talks are taking place with another NATO member, Greece, about territories in the Mediterranean. The EU threatens to impose sanctions on Turkey for its activities off the coast of Cyprus.
“There are many places of conflict: Syria and Libya. Perhaps, somewhere, the interests also intersect with the allies, but somewhere they overlap. There are very complicated issues here and many of those theaters of struggle, but we are not talking of that, “acknowledged the Lithuanian Foreign Minister, but added diplomatically:” This says once again that we have to talk. By the way, we are one of those who are showing this by example and telling our colleagues that the criticism through the press or the statements there will not bring positions together. We have always had a dialogue, in this case with the Turks, because they are strategic partners, not only members of the Alliance, but also candidates for the EU, what the skeptical. “
It is strictly prohibited to use the information published by DELFI on other websites, in the media or anywhere else, or to distribute our material in any way without consent, and if consent has been obtained, DELFI must be indicated as the source.
[ad_2]
