Last quote about NATO
All quotes about NATO
Just to be clear, that's a joke. The guardians of freedom, of tolerance, of equality and, yes, of justice. Fight for them and we really will be great again …. Far from being in retreat, democracy has been on the march. We should treasure Nato, not undermine it. We won't make American great by making eastern Europe weaker again. There is a powerful moral argument that we should love our neighbour, whether at home or the other side of the world. Leaving the European Union does not mean we're leaving Europe. I don't have to listen any more to the wiretaps of Donald Trump's conversations.
Mr. Putin is going right down the game plan that started with the interference in the elections and undermining the U.S. globally because at the end of the day, deterrence – which equals peace – is composed of two things: capability, we've got a great military; the other is credibility. Our credibility is shredding in front of us. Russia is not going to attack the United States. They're not going to blow a U.S. aircraft out of the air. But I think over time what they're going to try to do is crack the NATO alliance.
Some of President Trump’s support came from voters who did not agree with him on a number of issues and may not have liked him all that much. But, they reasoned, he was rich and successful so he could help America (and people like them) win. No question but that superficial aura of confidence and business experience Trump conjured up was enough to win over voters who didn’t much listen to the details of what he was saying or focus on his incoherent, a-factual utterances.
Germany owes vast sums of money to NATO.
Not a single NATO member state pays its entire defense budget into NATO.
Some pro-Russian people might use the mistreatment of Latgale as a hook, you know? As an excuse. If Russia came and tried to invade Latgale I think there would be people who would welcome them. We can't really rely on NATO, we can't really rely on anybody else, just ourselves.
Putin is not good. He's a killer, and he's our neighbor 20 miles away. Of course we're nervous but we've lived next to Russia for 800 years and know what they're like only too well. If they invade I will go and live in the forest.
Who knows if war could happen again, but I hope not. We still trust in NATO's common security system. We still trust it.
We are ready for war. We know that some day it will come to Latvia and it will mean a battleground for us.
A lot of people who live here watch TV that comes from Russia. It's propaganda and all part of the hybrid war.
I think Trump wants everything to be great in America but he doesn't care about Europe and he doesn't care about us. I'm really afraid of Russian interference. It's very close to the border and I don't want to be the first participant of World War III.
I like Trump and I hope he will be peaceful with Russia. I don't think Putin is interested in the Baltics. He doesn't need it. We are just neighbors.
We are like a coin, we have two sides. Our relationship with Russia has potential. But there is also an element of threat.
Russia is a very friendly and peaceful nation but it has an unfair reputation. Russia is not an aggressor. Russia is not interested in making aggression for the Baltic states.
I feel angry about the treatment of Latgalian, of course. We've been betrayed and I think this betrayal is dangerous.
I think Trump doesn't care about us.
All of us working here are Russians and it's a problem. Because of these rules, it's getting harder. Not all of us speak Latvian so we are worried about work.
We are not the entirety of NATO's response.
This is a mission, not a cycle of training events. The purpose is to deter aggression in the Baltics and in Poland ... We are fully ready to be lethal.
Those who currently don't spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense are now increasing their defense budgets. That's a good thing. But no funds will be paid to the U.S. They are meant to increase NATO's overall defense capabilities, given the growing Russian threat.
Our two nations share much in common, including our desire for prosperity, security, and peace.
This is not a financial transaction, where NATO countries pay the U.S. to defend them. It is part of our treaty commitment.
Europe must spend more on defense, but not as favor (or payment) to the U.S. But because their security requires it.
Nevertheless, Germany owes vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany! Many nations owe vast sums of money from past years and it is very unfair to the United States. These nations must pay what they owe.
It's much, much better to talk to one another than about one another.
I'm sorry, Mr President but that is not how Nato works.
Germany owes vast sums of money to NATO and the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany!
Nobody in Estonia wants to be left out in the cold because Germany doesn't spend enough money on defense.
Trump's comments misrepresent the way NATO functions. The president keeps saying that we need to be paid by the Europeans for the fact that we have troops in Europe or provide defense there. But that's not how it works.
When we help people in their home countries to live a better life and thereby prevent crises, this is also a contribution to security. So I will not be drawn into a debate about who is more military-minded and who is less.
For me, as a Latvian, it sounds a little bit bitter that support for my borders and the security of my country will be challenged because some other European nations will not pay their share.
Nothing would be worse for Merkel than being seen as taking orders from Trump. Ultimately, I predict Germany will increase spending – but at the pace it had already committed to.
Despite what you have heard from the FAKE NEWS, I had a GREAT meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
Nevertheless, Germany owes ... vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany!
Already, because of this new business climate, we are creating jobs that are starting to pour back into our country like we haven't seen in many, many decades. In the first two job reports since I took the oath of office, we've already added nearly half a million new jobs. And believe me, it's just beginning. Many (NATO) nations owe vast sums of money from past years and it is very unfair to the United States. These nations must pay what they owe.
In the face of an increasingly assertive Russia, Nato is stepping up its commitment to collective defence. British troops will play a leading role in Estonia and support our US allies in Poland, as part of wider efforts to defend Nato. Our rising defence budget means we can support those deployments in the long-term and strengthen our commitment to European security.
If they fulfill their obligations to us, the answer is yes.
I said a long time ago that Nato had problems. No1 it was obsolete, because it was designed many, many years ago. No2 the countries weren't paying what they're supposed to be paying.
We fought two world wars in Europe, and one cold war. Keeping Europe whole, free, and at peace, is vital US interest.
Many nations owe vast sums of money from past years and it is very unfair to the United States. These nations must pay what they owe. During our meeting, I thanked Chancellor Merkel for the German government's commitment to increase defense spending and work toward contributing at least 2% of GDP. Well, I'm not saying if not. I'm saying, right now there are many countries that have not fulfilled their obligations to us.
Sorry, Mr President, that's not how Nato works. The US decides for itself how much it contributes to defending Nato. This is not a financial transaction, where Nato countries pay the US to defend them. It is part of our treaty commitment.
Do you want to have a handshake?
I reiterated to Chancellor Merkel our strong support for NATO, as well as the need for our NATO allies to pay their fair share for the cost of defense.
On wiretapping by this past administration, at least we have something in common, perhaps.
As far as wiretapping, I guess by this past administration, at least we have something in common, perhaps. That was a statement made by a very talented lawyer on Fox, and so you shouldn't be talking to me, you should be talking to Fox. Okay?
At least we have something in common.
She "agreed to continue my efforts to persuade my fellow European leaders to deliver on their commitment to spend 2 percent of GDP on defense, so that the burden is more fairly shared.
I reiterated to Chancellor Merkel my strong support for NATO as well as the need for our NATO allies to pay their fair share for the cost defense. Many nations owe vast sums of money from past years and it is very unfair to the United States. These nations must pay what they owe.
I don't know what newspaper you're reading, but I guess that would be an example of fake news.
You know what a disaster this massive immigration has been to Germany and the people of Germany. Crime has risen to levels that no one thought they would ever, ever see. It is a catastrophe.
I am deeply convinced that the trans-Atlantic partnership, based on common values, is in all of our interests, not only for us Europeans. I'll hold my talks with President Donald Trump in this spirit in the coming week.
I've always thought it is better to talk to one another, rather than about one another.
Would you like to go first? Nice friendly reporter.
You know, I think he makes a really, really strong case for term limits. I think maybe he's past his prime; I think maybe he's gotten a little bit unhinged.
There has been progress but the job is far from done, we still have no fair burden-sharing within our alliance. It is realistic that all allies reach the goal of two percent. This is not just about a call from the Unites States and President Trump. It is in Europe's best interest to spend more on defence. We have a long way to go but at least after years of decline, we are now starting to see an increase.
So this is not a pirate attack, it's angry fishermen trying to protect their area so that they can fish. That livelihood has been disrupted by constant threats from these ships fishing illegally.
One of the main problems with deterring piracy is only having 35-40 percent of ships in the High Risk Area with armed guards on board commercial vessels. There's a perception that the capability isn't there, but it's just that motives have changed to being political rather than primarily economic.
Usually pirates reinforce with guards from the shore and use the village to resupply.
By leaving the UK it would also leave Nato - of course it is absolutely possible to apply for membership and then the allies will then decide.
These comparisons are totally misleading, they belittle the suffering, especially in the case of the Netherlands which suffered so much under the Nazis. This is completely unacceptable and that's why the Netherlands have my full support and solidarity, especially also my Dutch colleague Mark Rutte.
I will encourage all allies to show mutual respect to be calm and have a measured approach to contribute to deescalate the tensions. I think it is important that we now focus on everything that unites us.
While the security situation has seriously deteriorated in recent years as a result of threats from Russia, the Middle East and North Africa, the operational readiness of the armed forces has been further hollowed out.
My worry is, as we face the debate on the size of the armed forces, for example, on Russia's side and in the Baltics and in Poland…the debate in the US about the exorbitant increase in its military budget, that we are again facing the danger of a new arms race spiral.
Let's sit down as part of the NATO-Russia Council. But instead of repeating pro-Ukrainian, pro-coup – as I would put it – claims, lets…start working on what it was created for. Lets focus on European and Atlantic security.
Maybe, with respect to the United States, you need to be careful what you wish for. Mr. Trump says that NATO may be obsolete, and that we need to be more independent. Well, maybe we will.
We strongly support NATO, an alliance forged through the bonds of two World Wars that dethroned fascism, and a Cold War that defeated communism. But our partners must meet their financial obligations. And now, based on our very strong and frank discussions, they are beginning to do just that. In fact, I can tell you the money is pouring in.
You see in many parts of Europe a retreat to nationalism, a de-emphasis on human rights. You see in the countries of our NATO allies the imprisoning of journalists. We're seeing an awful turn away from representative government, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.
Specifically? I give you a concrete example. The Americans say Nato one day is a very nice thing another day is a problem. In any case Europe must work for its own defence. So, a first reinforced cooperation could be 10 European countries start slowly putting together a defence.
Don't believe those who are saying that we have to spend more and more and more on defense. There are other means to safeguard the stability.
I'm still in favor of the European Union being a soft power.
The military potential that the Russian Federation has built up here at the border is completely irrational in my view because there is zero threat emanating from these countries.
No one expects a real military confrontation to happen here, but what there is, and what has been reported in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, are attempts at massive disinformation and influence campaigns.
We also have to consider whether Europe wants a Germany that invests 60 billion euros a year in the German army… This would be military supremacy in Europe, and I think our neighbors would not like to see that.
I think we need to ponder a couple of other aspects, starting with the fact that I do not believe that the security of Europe can be guaranteed solely with defence spending. Most wars and refugee developments that we are currently facing cannot be solved with more spending on equipment, but by protecting people from famine, poverty and war.
We strongly support NATO, an alliance forged through the bonds of two World Wars that dethroned fascism and a Cold War that defeated communism. But our partners must meet their financial obligations. And now, based on our very strong and frank discussions, they are beginning to do just that. In fact, I can tell you the money is pouring in. Very nice. We expect our partners, whether in NATO, in the Middle East, or the Pacific, to take a direct and meaningful role in both strategic and military operations, and pay their fair share of the cost.
We strongly support NATO, an alliance forged through the bonds of two World Wars that dethroned fascism and a Cold War that defeated communism. But our partners must meet their financial obligations. And now, based on our very strong and frank discussions, they are beginning to do just that. In fact, I can tell you the money is pouring in. Very nice.
We expect our partners, whether in NATO, in the Middle East, or the Pacific, to take a direct and meaningful role in both strategic and military operations, and pay their fair share of the cost.
Our military will be given the resources its brave warriors richly deserve. My budget will also increase funding for our veterans. Our foreign policy calls for a direct, robust and meaningful engagement with the world. We strongly support NATO, an alliance forged through the bonds of two World Wars that dethroned fascism, and a Cold War that defeated communism. But our partners must meet their financial obligations. My job is not to represent the world. My job is to represent the United States of America. But we know that America is better off when there is less conflict -- not more.
We need to consider that all western countries today are willing to increase their defense spending. All our businesses are driving a better growth in 2016 compared to 2015. In the U.S., we don't sell that much to the defense sector as oppose to what we sell in defense in Europe and in particular in the Middle East.
We must stand strong in defense of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of nations in Europe. In the wake of Russian efforts to re-draw international borders by force, we will support efforts in Poland and the Baltic states through NATO's Enhanced Forward Presence initiative. The president of the United States and the American people expect our allies to keep their word and to do more in our common defense. And the president expects real progress by the end of 2017. If you don't yet have a plan – get one.
Too much has happened in the last month, in your country and in the EU, too many new and sometimes surprising opinions have been voiced in this time about our relations and our common security, for us to pretend that everything is as it used to be.
It is my privilege on behalf of President Trump to express the strong commitment of the United States to continued cooperation and partnership with the European Union. Whatever our differences, our two continents share the same heritage, the same values and above all the same purpose, to promote peace and prosperity through freedom, democracy and the rule of law, and to those objectives we will remain committed.
The idea of NATO is not obsolete, just like the values which lie at its foundation are not obsolete.
We have to be agile. We have to be prepared for the unforeseen. And that's exactly what we are doing when we are increasing the readiness of our forces, when we are increasing the presence of our forces in the eastern part of the alliance ? and we are.
On Feb. 20, the ceasefire regime will start, and withdrawal of heavy military hardware will also start to the places where they are supposed to be. We have actively supported this decision and obviously expressed a conviction that this time, failure should not be allowed to take place.
We have seen a more assertive Russia. We have seen a Russia that has invested heavily in new military capabilities, which has tripled spending on defense over the last years, and ? most importantly ? which has been willing to use military force against neighbors in Georgia and Ukraine. And that's exactly why NATO is responding in a measured defensive way.
The Minsk agreement is the only channel we have to bring a solution to this conflict. The Minsk agreement started on the assumption that there was a road map, but when it was enacted there was no continuous ceasefire.
We've got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country's so innocent?
I have no doubts that the American vice president, and also the defense minister, will do everything to take responsibility within NATO as in the past, and I don't think there is a big argument inside the American government. Since I haven't spoken to him, I can only say what I discussed with Mr. Pence - I did that and there are no doubts there.
They've all been consistent about the fact that there is a strong, deep and enduring commitment to Europe and to NATO and I think that message has been received.
Looks like we have 2 governments. (at)VP just gave speech about shared values btwn US and Europe as (at)POTUS openly wages war on those values.
That means they will distrust institutions, politicians, and maybe that is a bit of the aim ? to get people confused and increase the distrust.
We are using one percent of our gross (domestic) product on development aid and conflict prevention, trying to solve problems around the world that lead to conflict and lead to the need for more military expenditure. There I think the Americans could follow a little bit better on. His basic view is to be against something -- Western values and Western ideas. It is a challenge. If you can't believe what's in the media, if you can't believe what you're reading, then there will be a lot of people who have distrust for everything.
Creating jobs and job opportunities for young people in Europe, in Africa, is the most important part: that's the part of globalization that is important. We have to also be competitive, we have to make sure that we can create new jobs all around the world, because if large parts of our population don't have any hope for the future, and especially if young people don't have any hope for the future, they will be targets for extremists. That's the job of all political leaders.
We have to be agile, we have to be prepared for the unforeseen, and that's exactly what we are doing.
The message from secretary Mattis was very firm and fair because it is fair of the U.S. to ask for more defense spending across Europe and Canada. We are seeing a more assertive Russia. We are seeing a Russia which has invested heavily in new military capabilities, which has tripled its spending on defense over the last years and, most important, which has been willing to use military force against neighbors in Georgia and Ukraine.
Today, tomorrow and every day hence, be confident that the United States is now and will always be your greatest ally. President Trump and the American people are fully devoted to our transatlantic union.
Russia is a neighbour of the European Union. Russia is on our external borders. I won't let up in efforts to establish a better relationship with Russia despite differing opinions on many issues.
Know this: The United States will continue to hold Russia accountable, even as we search for new common ground which as you know President Trump believes can be found. Let me be clear on this point: The president of the United States expects our allies to keep their word, to fulfill this commitment and, for most, that means the time has come to do more.
We only know what the media has reported and the statements that we've got. Now we are waiting for actions of the new government of Donald Trump.
Acting together strengthens everyone.
Will we be able to continue working well together or will we all fall back into our individual roles? I call on us, and I hope we will find a common position on this, let's make the world better together and then things will get better for every single one of us.
We are taking these people in and integrating them and preventing them going to other parts of the world as 'freedom fighter.
The question is not funding NATO or changing budgets, but how Europe can ... improve its deployability without creating a European army.
When even one ally fails to do their part, it undermines all of our ability to come to each other's aid.
President Trump came into office and has thrown now his full support to NATO. He too espouses NATO's need to adapt to today's strategic situation for it to remain credible, capable, and relevant. I have great respect for Germany's leadership in Europe – and for the ethical performance of your troops on the battlefield.
Our position is what has been agreed (between NATO countries) should be fulfilled, that's so simple in my opinion. I think that Europeans start to understand that they have to take more responsibility of their own security in spite of the fact that they are members of NATO and have a lot of trust to NATO.
I owe it to you to give you clarity on the political reality in the United States, and to state the fair demand from my country's people in concrete terms. America will meet its responsibilities, but if your nations do not want to see America moderate its commitment to this alliance, each of your capitals needs to show support for our common defence. Our community of nations is under threat on multiple fronts as the arc of insecurity builds on NATO's periphery and beyond.
It has been the American message for many, many years. I am very much against letting ourselves be pushed into this. I don't like our American friends narrowing down this concept of security to the military. If you look at what Europe is doing in defence, plus development aid, plus humanitarian aid, the comparison with the United States looks rather different. Modern politics cannot just be about raising defence spending. Europeans must bundle their defence spending better and spend the money more efficiently.
This multinational cooperation through NATO is a clear way for countries to significantly improve their armed forces while ensuring the greatest value for money for their taxpayers.
This is a way to make what we do more efficient, and increase output.
"It's in everyone's interest to resume dialogue between the intelligence agencies of the United States and other members of NATO,". "It's absolutely clear that in the area of counter-terrorism all relevant governments and international groups should work together".
All members of NATO contributing a fair share of the burden. So other countries need to step up now to meet the commitment to spend two percent that we all agreed back at the Wales summit two and a half years ago. The impatience of the American taxpayer is a reality.
"America cannot care more for your children's future security than you do."
America cannot care more for your children's future security than you do. America will meet its responsibilities, but if your nations do not want to see America moderate its commitment to this Alliance, each of your capitals needs to show support for our common defense.
It's in everyone's interest to resume dialogue between the intelligence agencies of the United States and other members of NATO. It's absolutely clear that in the area of counter-terrorism all relevant governments and international groups should work together.
I have no need to respond to the Russian statement at all. NATO has always stood for military strength and protection of the democracies and the freedoms we intend to pass on to our children.
One minute NATO is obsolete - the next minute he loves NATO. One minute NATO is an impediment and doesn't do anything for terrorism - the next minute NATO is the centerpiece of the global fight. Because of his personality: he's calm, he's centered, he's thoughtful, he's widely regarded with respect on both sides of the aisle in the United States.
I think from the administration's point of view, this is an opportunity to make a very major pronouncement on its foreign policy and its European policy.
"If your nations do not want to see America moderate its commitment to this alliance, each of your capitals needs to show support for our common defence."
"We are asking them to commit to an annual increase, which would at least demonstrate good faith,". "Nineteen members of the alliance don't reach 1.5 percent and five of those 19 don't reach 1 percent.".
Compliance with arms control agreements is of great importance and especially when it comes to treaties covering nuclear weapons. Any non-compliance of Russia with the INF Treaty would be a serious concern for the alliance.
The events of 2014 were sobering and we must continue to adapt to what's been revealed to us in terms of our security challenges. The alliance remains a fundamental bedrock for the US.
We are asking them to commit to an annual increase, which would at least demonstrate good faith. Nineteen members of the alliance don't reach 1.5 percent and five of those 19 don't reach 1 percent.
We do reduce defense spending in times when tensions are going down, we have to be able to increase defense spending when tensions are going up as they are now. In my two phone calls with President Trump defense spending has been a main topic and he has strongly expressed his strong commitment to NATO, to the transatlantic bond but at the same time President Trump has in both the phone calls also underlined the importance of a fairer burden sharing… And I agree with him.
"Nobody officially accused Russia of violating the INF treaty,". "Of course Russia was and remains committed to its international obligations, including in the framework of the agreement.".
America will meet its responsibilities, but if your nations do not want to see America moderate its commitment to this Alliance, each of your capitals needs to show support for our common defence.
As long as we are strong, as long as we are united, as long as we are predictable, then we can also engage in a political dialogue with Russia. So I welcome a dialogue between NATO and Russia, but also of course between NATO allies, including the United States and Russia.
Frankly, this has no impact. I haven't changed what I'm heading there for. It doesn't change my message at all. Who is on the president's staff is who I will work with. And so, you know, it's full speed ahead.
"General Flynn's resignation also raises further questions about the Trump administration's intentions toward Vladimir Putin's Russia, including statements by the president suggesting moral equivalence between the United States and Russia despite its invasion of Ukraine, annexation of Crimea, threats to our NATO allies, and attempted interference in American elections,"
General Flynn's resignation is a troubling indication of the dysfunction of the current national security apparatus. General Flynn's resignation also raises further questions about the Trump administration's intentions toward Vladimir Putin's Russia, including statements by the President suggesting moral equivalence between the United States and Russia despite its invasion of Ukraine, annexation of Crimea, threats to our NATO allies, and attempted interference in American elections.
We engaged with Sputnik, RT and others to correct, as there was a forest fire at some distance from the base, but with no connection to it.
NATO has been dealing with a significant increase in Russian propaganda and disinformation since Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. Such a call never took place and this was an obvious example of disinformation. We engaged with Sputnik, RT and others to correct, as there was a forest fire at some distance from the base, but with no connection to it.
I have adequate resources in my counterterrorism mission. In my train, advise and assist mission, however, we have a shortfall of a few thousand. This is in the NATO train, advise and assist mission, so it can come from America or its allies.
"God bless President Trump"
Every ally is locked in. It is impossible for Washington to act unilaterally without upsetting allies.
I am not hearing anything that would tell me otherwise.
A Le Pen win in France with a clear program to put the EU, the euro, NATO, etc up for referendum of course is going to drive these spread yields as we get closer to the election.
Romania needs a strong government which works transparently, which governs predictably, in the light of day, not hiding at night. Make good laws for Romania, not for a group of politicians with problems. That's what our EU and NATO partners expect from us.
It's gotten to a point where it's not even being reported. And in many cases, the very, very dishonest press doesn't want to report it. They have their reasons and you understand that. We only ask that all of the NATO members make their full and proper financial contributions to the NATO Alliance, which many of them have not been doing. Many of them have not been even close. And they have to do that.
We have your back every hour, and every day, now and always. That also means getting our allies to pay their fair share. It's been very unfair to us. We strongly support Nato. We only ask that all of the Nato members make their full and proper financial contributions which many have them not been doing. Many of them have not been even close and they have to do that. Any negative polls are fake news, just like polls in the election. Sorry, people want border security and extreme vetting. I call my own shots, largely based on an accumulation of data, and everyone knows it.
America stands with those who stand in defense of freedom. We have your back every hour, every day, now and always. That also means getting our allies to pay their fair share but a very unfair (share) to us. We strongly support NATO. We only ask that all of the NATO members make their full and proper financial contributions to the NATO alliance which many of them have not been doing.
A recent outburst in fighting in the Donbass, observed since January 28, follows a cyclical pattern of intensification and de-escalation, characteristic to this conflict. A frozen-conflict in the Donbass serves Russia's goals of preventing Ukraine from joining the EU and NATO. A more sustainable settlement would likely entail a wider agreement between Russia and Western powers, including the U.S.
"We've got a lot of killers ... You think our country's so innocent? You think our country's so innocent?"
Only reason we should ever lift sanctions on #Putin is if he meets conditions of sanctions & ends violations of #ukraine sovereignty.
Both U.S. Vice President Pence and his colleague Tillerson made it clear in the talks that they have a strong interest in a united Europe, that they stand by a transatlantic partnership in NATO.
I am absolutely certain that the new president and the new administration will be strongly committed to a strong NATO.
Yes, this decree is the ministry's call, and I assume responsibility for that. As long as I am minister and I have signed the two draft bills, I take total responsibility for them.
We express regret for this hostile stance of the minister. We are sure that such allegations are baseless.
Today we see a country that in weaponizing misinformation has created what we might now see as the post-truth age. Part of that is the use of cyber-weaponry to disrupt critical infrastructure and disable democratic machinery. Russia is clearly testing NATO and the West. It is seeking to expand its sphere of influence, destabilize countries and weaken the alliance. Therefore it is in our interest and Europe's to keep NATO strong and to deter and dissuade Russia from this course.
To appoint an ambassador, better for him to believe in the institution with which he would have to work. It is as simple as that. Who knows what the president of the United States really wants (on NATO)?
President Trump has spoken about the need for engagement with Russia – he's right. We need to understand Russia better. There is nothing inevitable about a retreat to the days of the Cold War.
Many countries have to realize that their future is first in the European Union, rather than who knows what bilateral relation with the United States. Who knows what the president of the United States really wants (on NATO)?
Europe should realise that it would be more secure, reliable and happier with Ukraine.
We call for an immediate return to the ceasefire and withdrawal of all heavy weapons banned under the Minsk agreements. OSCE monitors must be guaranteed free and safe access throughout the region. This must include Ukraine's border with Russia.
Would he have been able to lay the foundations of a trade deal? No. Would he have got a 100 percent commitment to NATO? No. That's what Labour has to offer this country. Less protection for British citizens, less prosperous, less safe. He can lead a protest, I'm leading a country.
Any meeting needs to have a solid basis in intelligence. I can't think of any subject that's going to be addressed at the NSC level or at the Cabinet level that's going to not require the perspective of our intelligence agencies.
To not have the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at all National Security Council meetings I think is a huge mistake. You need that expertise at every meeting. And same with the director of National Intelligence.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs brings professional military advice to any crisis discussion.
We will deter and defend across the whole spectrum of conflict.
Russian aggression takes many forms. Cyber, misinformation, threatening other countries, Russian snap exercises. We're serious – this is not just a training exercise. It's to demonstrate a strategic message that you cannot violate the sovereignty of members of NATO ... Moscow will get the message – I'm confident of it.
God bless President Trump.
I don't see, and I have not heard, anything that would lead me to think that this could be curtailed. Our president has spoken with Prime Minister (Theresa) May, Chancellor (Angela) Merkel and President (Francois) Hollande and what I have heard is the affirmation of the importance of NATO and the United States commitment to NATO.
He will override. I'm giving him that power. It's very early to be talking about that. If we can have a great relationship with Russia and with China and with all countries, I'm all for that. That would be a tremendous asset. I don't say good, bad or indifferent. I don't know the gentleman. I hope we have a fantastic relationship. That's possible and it's also possible that we won't. We will see what happens. I think Brexit's going to be a wonderful thing for your country. Brexit was an example of what was to come.
On defence and security cooperation, we are united in our recognition of NATO as the bulwark of our collective defense, and today we've reaffirmed our unshakable commitment to this alliance. Mr. President, I think you said, you confirmed that you're 100 percent behind NATO.
We'll see what happens. We look to have a great relationship with all countries, ideally.
[Mattis] has stated publicly that he does not necessarily believe in torture. I don't necessarily agree, but I would tell you that he would override because I'm giving him that power. He's an expert. I've had many times when I thought I would get along with people, and I don't like them at all. And I've had some where I didn't think we'd have much of a relationship and it turned out to be a great relationship. We had a very good call. I have been very strong on Mexico. I'm not as brash as you might think. Brexit was an example of what was to come.
It will take detailed work, but we welcome your openness to these discussions and hope we can make progress so that the new global Britain that emerges after Brexit is even better equipped to take its place confidently in the world. America's leadership role in NATO -- supported by Britain -- must be the central element around which the Alliance is built. Brexit must mean control of the number of people who come to Britain from Europe. And that is what we will deliver.
I think I am a people person, and I think you are also, Theresa. The special relationship between our two countries has been one of the great forces for justice and for peace, and by the way, my mother was born in Scotland. If we can have a great relationship with Russia, with China, with all countries, I'm for that. No guarantees, but if we can, that would be positive.
They both need this to be a success.
I said a long time ago – that NATO had problems. Number one it was obsolete, because it was, you know, designed many, many years ago. Number two – the countries aren't paying what they're supposed to pay. I took such heat, when I said NATO was obsolete. It's obsolete because it wasn't taking care of terror.
And I said a long time ago that NATO had problems. Number one: it was obsolete because it was designed many many years ago. Number two: the countries weren't paying what they're supposed to pay.
I expect to see a modest increase in military expenditures by a number of NATO countries over the next few years. This would be beneficial, for them, and for global security, generally. The mere possibility that a U.S. president might not honor defense commitments made over several decades likely induced NATO member states that had grown dependent upon the American security umbrella to hedge their bets...Trump's criticisms of NATO might have prompted some changes in the alliance's posture even if he had not been elected.
NATO may not become obsolete, but it does need to consider the structure of the alliance. At the bare minimum, NATO will continue to exist as a coordinating mechanism that allows member states to share information and work together on security operations.
Donald Trump is treating the world economy as a zero-sum game, the assumption being 'make America first, we win or they win'. He's talking down NATO, the European community. He's making it seem as if trade is really bad for the United States and therefore we are going to put up trade barriers. This is not the kind of talk that will inspire confidence in global markets. And so I don't think this so-called rally, this Trump rally, is going to continue much longer.
NATO countries have been aware of the integrated air and missile defence challenge for some time. We have to get on it, but we're not there yet.
I know what worries me most, but I have no idea what he'll do because I don't think he knows either.
Is globalisation in retreat? Is Russia going to be the United States' new special relationship? Is the future of the EU, or of NATO even, in jeopardy? These are some of the big questions that have been swirling around the Davos forum this year.
The two leaders discussed the importance of our shared values, and the secretary emphasized that when looking for allies to help defend these values, the United States always starts with Europe. Both pledged to consult in the months to come and look forward to meeting in person during the NATO Defense Ministerial in February.
Whenever I find there is something unacceptable, I won't be afraid to say that to Donald Trump. I think the biggest statement that will be made about the role of women is that fact that I will be there as a female prime minister, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
We cannot trust Trump to take care of [Europe's] security. If Trump cuts a deal with Putin, then maybe there will be fewer tanks, American tanks, on European soil and we should prepare for that scenario.
I think we're already seeing that happening. Almost all of Trump's comments have got the attention of NATO governments.
The military operation [in Afghanistan] was a direct response on an attack on the United States. So NATO is important both for Europe, and for the United States.
It's certainly freaked people out.
A lot of these countries aren't paying what they're supposed to be paying, which I think is very unfair to the United States. With that being said, NATO is very important to me. There are five countries that are paying what they're supposed to. Five. It's not much.
If you have only the focus on the United States, with no support for the institutions (such as EU, NATO) that are the glue that keeps the world together – then it will be a very difficult time indeed.
Market access, for a small country who is very export-oriented, is extremely important.
When things change in the European Union inside the single market framework, we are participating in that. … It's for Norwegian businesses.
I think the United States always will need some friends with the same types of values and their closest friends are in the NATO alliance.
I think it's very important that an organisation like NATO answers to today's security issues and, yes, I think all European countries are increasing their spending on defense.
It is very important that the European defense structures, security and foreign policy structures also be strengthened in the future. NATO is very important... a cornerstone in all that.
Of course, I have a background as a Eurosceptic politician but there are quite many in the U.K. nowadays.
The thing is, we must live in the real world and even though the U.K. is leaving the European Union, it does not leave Europe.
The good news is, in security matters which I am standing up for, we will still be with our British friends in NATO.
NATO, mainly this is not a question of money, it is a question of security. Russian aggression demonstrated again there is no other security system but NATO which was effective to stop the aggression.
If NATO power structures could not think of better ways to use its forces rather than in Estonia on the border with Russia, it means its intelligence is doing a poor job. It means NATO does not realise what's going on in other parts of the world, parts of the world that are under NATO responsibility.
It's not for me to prove any of this is false, as far as I know there is a presumption of innocence, so it's up to you to prove it's true.It's the same people who fail to create universal rules to bestow order on the media, who fail to consolidate efforts to fight cyber fraud who are accusing us, without any proof, of taking almost the entire world under our control.
If the NATO forces do not see any other place for themselves aside from the Russian-Estonian border, it means their Intelligence services are not doing a good job as they don't see what is happening in other areas.
The Congress cannot get cold feet because the people will not let that happen.
With respect to the German auto industry, one will have to explain to him that German companies are already producing in the United States and exporting to the whole world from there. That would be in jeopardy if Trump sets an international protectionist spiral into motion.
He will have to speak to that, as of Friday he is responsible for that relationship [with Germany].
Obviously the comments from President-elect Trump, that he views NATO as obsolete, were viewed with anxiety.
Europe is not able to replace the security role of the United States so there is a lot at stake – the very foundations of liberal order internationally and European security. And for that we should fight because it is our very existential interest.
I've spoken today not only with EU foreign ministers but NATO foreign ministers as well and can report that the signals are that there's been no easing of tensions.
We're not weak and inferior.
We reshape them, remold them, and resell them for local use. We are a very popular brand, thanks to NATO.
The best cartridges are used by NATO forces across the border, in the thousands. The empties are picked up by scrap collectors and then hauled from Afghanistan to us, here.
This outstanding brigade is a highly capable and ready force, with the best equipment, leadership and training of any combat force in the world.
It's a great day when we can welcome American soldiers, representatives of the world's best, strongest, greatest army onto Polish soil, here in Zagan.
This is of course a serious risk.
We are under great pressure from both the current Obama administration and, from what we understand, the incoming president Trump to live up to the 2 percent target. I would say it is not a realistic (target to reach).
I will make a long statement about NATO, talking about the fact that many countries are not paying their fair share. That means we are protecting them and they are getting all sorts of military protection and other things and they're ripping off the United States. And they're ripping you off. I don't want to do that. Either they pay up including for past deficiencies or they have to get out. And if it breaks up NATO, it breaks up NATO.
The gap between the rich and poor, increased racial tension, a little less support for our fortress against communism, NATO and Europe, getting in the way of international trade agreements, complicating them. Those things are all negative for the market in the long run.
We take these actions as another example of provocative military activities close to the Russian borders in the frameworks of infamous policy of Russian containment. It is obvious the goal of these efforts as well as hasty deployment of heavy military assets in Europe is an attempt of the outgoing Obama's administration to complicate as much as possible the bilateral relations.
I would see us maintaining the strongest possible relationship with NATO.
History is clear: nations with strong allies thrive and those without them wither. NATO is central to our defense. It facilitates European stability, and as a military alliance it helps sustain our values. I believe the Alliance must harness renewed political will to confront and walk back aggressive Russian actions and other threats to the security of its members.
He comes because he's a man of thought as well as action. and sometimes it's said you can judge people by the friends he makes, the company he keeps. but also by the books he reads.
The president-elect has already made it clear that we're going to meet our obligations to Israel as the most important ally in the region. Russia today poses a danger, but it is not unpredictable in advancing its own interests. NATO allies are right to be alarmed.
Russia today poses a danger, but it is not unpredictable in advancing its own interests. It has invaded Ukraine, including the taking of Crimea, and supported Syrian forces that brutally violate the laws of war. Our NATO allies are right to be alarmed at a resurgent Russia.
[Russia] has invaded Ukraine, including the taking of Crimea, and supported Syrian forces that brutally violate the laws of war. Our NATO allies are right to be alarmed at a resurgent Russia.
The best way to maintain the peace is through preparation, . This is just showing the strength and cohesion of the alliance and the U.S. commitment to maintain the peace on the continent.
Tanks never create peace anywhere. Quite the contrary, a troop deployment of such a scale is part of always increasing buildup and provocation.
To occupy Crimea and interfere in eastern Ukraine and continues to threaten other nations in the region.
I am convinced and certain that our relations, and the American relationship with NATO, will remain the same. I think the presence of United States troops here in Estonia is a signal that we believe in what Ronald Reagan believed, and that is peace through strength. Our relationship is more important than perhaps it's been in a long time. There's no doubt that the Russians were hacking.
I think it is very clear to us that both Republicans and Democrats are still firmly committed to Baltic States and to NATO and to our security.
We expect the Russian defense budget to fall again next year and it will sit below France in the No. 7 position by 2020, based on current plans, with a total defense budget of $41.4 billion.
The huge military expansion on the part of the Russians in the last five to six years is not sustainable.
In our view 2016 has seen a marked inflection in the outlook for defense expenditures, and we see BAE as a key beneficiary of this moving forward.
If Germany were to meet its 2 percent pledge ... it would be a significant increase in overall European defense spending. Germany is not going to do that overnight although they are moving in that direction.
There's already recognition among leaders in the European Union that countries need to do more [on defense].
Spending 2 percent of your gross domestic product on defense comes at the expense of other things. That's also political risk for any government.
There's a lot of nervous allies who aren't heeding the warning from the Washington establishment to make a distinction between what to take literally and what to take seriously.
The whole idea with re-enforcements is to prevent the conflict. It's to send a clear message of deterrence.
Russia has not been transparent.
It is imperative that we establish a framework for handling encounters between opposing militaries and the civilian aircraft and ships operating in their midst.
We count on having a frank discussion about the security situation in Europe … including … the consequences of NATO reinforcements on the eastern flank.
We count on having a frank discussion about the security situation in Europe, taking into account those factors that have an impact on it, including, of course, the consequences of NATO reinforcements on the eastern flank.
It's pragmatic. If they can put in a good effort, even if they don't have a good shot at winning, they'll do it. The benefits are so great they are willing to take risks. If you can greatly diminish NATO or undermine U.S. relations with Europe, it's worth it to them.
These activities are the embodiment of the United States' commitment to deterring aggression and defending our European allies and partners.
We hope that the new administration will recognize that Russia is a long-term strategic challenge for the United States and a strategic threat to this part of Eastern Europe.
We don't want to risk escalation, but send a message of our commitment.
It is in our economic interest that Europe is safe, secure, stable.
NATO allies strongly support all the efforts of the UN to make this happen, both the ceasefire, delivery of humanitarian aid and of course the evacuation of civilians. This will be the first step to a more lasting sustainable political solution to the conflict in Syria.
I have invited the members of the NATO-Russia Council to a meeting on Monday.
When tensions run high, as today, it is even more important to have direct dialogue with Russia.
If you can divide [Western countries], even in a half-assed way, that's good. If you can get people elected who look like they might rip up [institutions like NATO] on their own, that's even better.
The dangers are growing. Distrust between the U.S. and Russia, between NATO and Russia, is in a downward spiral.
We intend to keep the commitments that are made in the NATO agreement, which I think by any objective is one of the most if not the most successful military alliance in the world history. And I think we ought to approach all of these issues on the assumption that the Russians do not wish us well.
We stand together with Turkey, our NATO Ally, against all terrorists who threaten Turkey, the United States, and global peace and stability.
The only efficient way is to turn the boats and say: 'You cannot sail within this national border and if you do, you will either be shot at or be turned around and sailed back.
I call on all parties to redouble their efforts to implement the Minsk agreements in full. As a first step, we need to see an immediate and full cease-fire. In the meantime, the international community must keep pressuring Russia to respect its obligations. Especially while the security situation in eastern Ukraine remains so serious, it is important that economic sanctions be maintained.
I've said to General (Hulusi) Akar, my concern is that they would follow the rule of law and treat their people appropriately.
No ... These officers served well here in NATO.
Diplomacy offers the only viable solution to the conflict in Ukraine, so it is unfortunate that last week's meeting of the Normandy format was inconclusive.
Here we say 'show your face'. So full veiling is not appropriate here. It should be prohibited wherever legally possible. We are faced with a world, especially after the US election, that needs to re-order itself, with regard to NATO and the relationship with Russia.
We need to come together, to make sure there is a strong Europe, a strong NATO and that the values and the interests that we all share, we are continuing to work on together.
No one, not even someone with great experience, can change things for the good in Germany, in Europe, in the world more or less on their own - certainly not a chancellor of Germany. We are faced with a world, especially after the US election, that needs to re-order itself, with regard to Nato and the relationship with Russia.
We have a momentum now.
I hope it won't be the case, but who knows? We have to be ready every day.
It provides a sense of purpose, having a mission.
You might be right that a battlegroup will not be able to fight against an army. That's not the point. If an aggressor chose to attack this country, he would have to deal with other countries as well. That may drive the aggressor to rethink his intent.
He knows the Middle East, South Asia, NATO and other areas and has evinced both a nuanced approach to the wars we're in and an appreciation for the importance of allies. If he were to get the nomination, I suspect that he could attract a number of very talented people to work with him.
I don't think Russia is even concealing that their main target is not Baltics, but destroying the European Union and NATO.
If the Europeans will manage to invest better on their defence, this is also going to make NATO stronger. So there's no competition, no duplication. On the contrary, there is a joint work we are doing. Member states are, all 28, fully on board of this.
I think the criticism ... during this election campaign that a number of Nato countries aren't doing everything they can ... is entirely fair and we will see how the incoming administration wants to take that forward.
After this attack, American forces have agreed to share that information about their Afghan workers with us.
He was a former Taliban ... working inside the base for a long time, gained their trust, and based on that trust he carried out this attack.
The global security environment has changed dramatically in the last few years and NATO navies have adapted with it. NATO has increased maritime patrols in the Baltic and Black Seas. We are also working to help counter human smuggling in the Mediterranean.
Our defence budget shows that we have not reached the point where we should be, if we are talking about the expectations of our partners in NATO.
Trump will try again a reset with Russia, and remain, like Obama, reluctant to get involved with Ukraine. But I don't think NATO security guarantees will weaken, and Putin would be foolish to test this.
If we are not going to be reasonably reimbursed for the tremendous cost of protecting these massive nations with tremendous wealth … I would be absolutely prepared to tell those countries, Congratulations, you will be defending yourself.
Our Union is not equipped to face overwhelming defense challenges. Europe continues to rely heavily on NATO capabilities and on U.S. solidarity.
The deployment of Iskander and S-400 missiles to Kaliningrad is destabilising to European security. Russia has made threats to move Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad now for the past decade in response to a variety of developments in Europe, none of which demand such a military response.
Russia has made threats to move its Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad for the past decade in response to a variety of developments in Europe, none of which demand such a military response. We call on Russia to refrain from words or deeds that are inconsistent with the goal of promoting security and stability.
Why are we reacting to NATO expansion so emotionally? We are concerned by NATO's decision making. What should we do? We have, therefore, to take countermeasures, which means to target with our missile systems the facilities, that, in our opinion, start posing a threat to us.
As a country that suffers from terrorism, we cannot tolerate the fact that PKK members freely travel in European countries and walk through the corridors of the European Parliament carrying posters of the terrorist PKK leader (Abdullah Ocalan).
We are running the largest trade deficit every year, year after year, that any country has ever run in the history of the world.
Mitt Romney would be a move toward a more centrist foreign policy that I think would be helpful for the Trump administration in terms of reassuring global allies, partners and friends.
This is a tremendous opportunity that we've been given. And it's our time to think big, to reimagine this government and really to put people at the center of it.
I think he will play to the darker angels of this administration in terms of adopting very, very aggressive stance, very hard power, very anti-Islam.
We have seen some examples of some officers requesting asylum.
My main focus is to make sure that we have officers filling the different posts in the NATO command structure. When it comes to the question of asylum that is something that the different nations where the officers are seeking have to address, assess and make decisions on.
We both put emphasis on creating migration partnerships with African countries, we have to put all our efforts into getting a stable government in Libya as fast as possible. So, there was a high amount of agreement on our ambitions, our conceptions, and a strong commitment of both our countries to engage into making economicl development and creation of jobs a priority for both our countries, along with the control of migration.
Our work is on track. I want to see this as a smooth process, as an orderly process, working towards a solution that is in the interests of both the United Kingdom, but also in the interests of our European partners too.
What I will say is that history is long and can take unexpected paths. I think it is absolutely vital that that seat and every other seat that comes vacant on the court be filled by principled constitutionalists who will be faithful to the law and will check their own policy preferences at the door and simply honor their oath.
Across the board, the government is imposing draconian measures that limit freedom of expression.
It is true that certain Turkish officers who work at the command structure of NATO have requested asylum in the countries where they work. As usual, this is a question which must be evaluated and resolved by the different allies in NATO as a national decision.
I expect all allies to live up to those values. When I visited Turkey in September, the message from the Turkish leadership was that they would prosecute those responsible and Turkey has the right to prosecute (them).
Some Turkish officers working in Nato command structures, some of them have requested asylum in the countries where they are working. As always, this is an issue that is going to be assessed and decided by the different Nato allies as a national issue.
You have to increase defense spending when tensions go up.
We have started to move, although there is a very long way to go. I am certain that Trump will make this his top priority (for NATO).
I am absolutely confident that President Trump will maintain U.S leadership in the alliance.
Stop the cuts and gradually increase (defense spending) to reach 2 percent (of economic output) is a very robust message. We have started to move, although there is a very long way to go. I am certain that Trump will make this his top priority (for NATO).
In recent years we made historic investments in NATO, increased America's presence in Europe and today's NATO, the world's greatest alliance, is as strong and as ready as it has ever been.
Greece has done this even during difficult economic times. If Greece can meet this NATO commitment, all our NATO allies should be able to do so.
A strong NATO is important for Europe, but is also important for the United States. (President-elect Trump) also pointed out the importance of increased defence spending….that Europeans are stepping up their efforts to invest more in defence. and I absolutely agree with him. That has been the message from American leaders, US leaders, for many years and the good thing is that we now see that Europeans are actually investing more in defence.
First of of all, I think it is a very normal thing that president-elect Donald Trump speaks to world leaders, including of course the leader of Russia. The message from NATO has been that we want dialogue with Russia ... Especially when tensions are high, especially when we face many different challenges, it is important.
When we face many different security challenges, it is important to have a chance for political dialogue open with Russia. It is no contradiction between strong defense and political dialogue. NATO "will never accept the violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and that is why we have responded as we have to the Russian aggression.
We think it is important to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all nations, including Ukraine and therefore we will never respect or accept the violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine.
I think that's one of the most important functions I can serve at this stage, during this trip, is to let them know that there is no weakening of resolve when it comes to America's commitment to maintaining a strong and robust NATO relationship, and a recognition that those alliances aren't just good for Europe, they're good for the United States, and they're vital for the world.
I did say to him as I've said publicly that because of the nature of the campaigns and the bitterness and ferocity of the campaigns that it's really important to try to send some signals of unity and to reach out to minority groups or women or others that were concerned.
There's enormous continuity beneath the day-to-day news that makes us that indispensable nation when it comes to maintaining order and prosperity around the world. That will continue.
He's sincere in wanting to be a successful president. I think he's going to try as best he can to make sure he delivers.
There's enormous continuity beneath the day-to-day news that makes us that indispensable nation when it comes to maintaining order and promoting prosperity around the world. That will continue. In my conversation with the president-elect, he expressed a great interest in maintaining our core strategic relationships, and so one of the messages I will be able to deliver is his commitment to NATO and the Transatlantic Alliance.
Trump's victory undermines Europe's security.
Europe must not wait for the decisions of others. It should defend its interests and its strategic role in the world.
If they do not want to undermine NATO, they had better start reviewing their defence budgets as soon as possible and step up their commitments. Jens Stoltenberg, will have to show himself to be the equal of Manlio Brosio in his diplomatic skills to prevent the US and its European NATO allies from reopening a set of mutual recriminations that have not been voiced since the mid-1960s over the Vietnam war.
I really hope that the rhetoric on defence and Russia was mostly a part of the election campaign. I hope the election campaign is now over, and it is not yet time to panic.
We face the greatest challenges to our security in a generation. This is no time to question the partnership between Europe and the United States. (...) Going it alone is not an option.
Rather than deepening our differences, we need to nurture what unites us, and find the wisdom and foresight to work together for common solutions. Going it alone is not an option, either for Europe or for the United States.
A world without NATO would be the unraveling of the West.
It may be that his bark is worse than his bite.
A world without NATO would be the unraveling of the West. America would no longer provide the security guarantee it has given the world since 1949 when the treaty was signed, both in terms of nuclear and convention warfare. Europe would be completely vulnerable to any sort of Russian offensive.
Putin has taken a huge gamble in openly supporting the Trump candidacy. It worked, and it will embolden the Russian leader to take even bigger risks in the future.
The key question is who is going to be his secretary of state and who's going to be his secretary of defense. His team will play a key part.
The point about the alliance is not just about capability but also credibility.
It is all too easy to take the freedoms, security and prosperity we enjoy for granted. In these uncertain times we need strong American leadership, and we need Europeans to shoulder their fair share of the burden. But above all we need to recognise the value of the partnership between Europe and America. It remains indispensable.
We will get in contact with the new administration as soon as there is a structure to communicate with.
It is clear that the security situation has changed for the worse.
All allies have made a solemn commitment to defend each other. This is something which is unconditional and absolute.
The Trump administration in particular know that they are in a reasonably strong negotiating position when that debate starts in the next NATO Summit in Brussels in the spring 2017. So, I would expect that this would be a very hard and tough negotiating process.
We would like to know how things will proceed with global trade policy. We would like to know what intentions he has regarding the (NATO) alliance. We must know what climate policies he intends to pursue. This must be cleared up in the next few months.
NATO's security guarantees are important for Europe, but they are also important for the United States.
Given our geographical vicinity and common challenges in connection to the strategic situation in the North Atlantic, we are well positioned for future cooperation in maritime surveillance. The continuation of capacity for surveillance and anti-submarine operations are important for NATO and close allies.
I think the NATO alliance is every bit important today as it ever was. I think Article 5 means something. You attack any member of NATO you have us to deal with. I want the Russians to understand that fully.
The trade deal with the United States, I do not view that as something that would happen in the next two years.
Donald Trump said he wanted to ... stop paying for NATO, so countries like Poland need to ask themselves (what this means). Rather than lowering our heads, we must rise to the challenge.
The U.S. commitment to NATO and the collective defence of Europe has been rock solid for almost 70 years and I am absolutely confident that it will still be the case.
The idea that Trump's presidency is not going to create problems for NATO is delusional.
A Trump administration will almost certainly look to address issues of European security primarily through NATO, although there will big questions about appropriate levels of burden-sharing and the will of European governments to meet their 2 percent GDP spending obligations on defence.
As a candidate, Trump called into question NATO and trade agreements, and reached out to Moscow. His campaign of discrimination, lies and aggression harmed the principles of liberal democracy. Even if President Trump doesn't implement everything, Germany and Europe can't rely on the trans-Atlantic partnership as usual and have to stand up for Western values themselves.
We face a challenging new security environment, including hybrid warfare, cyberattacks, the threat of terrorism. U.S. leadership is as important as ever. ... A strong NATO is good for the United States, and good for Europe.
I hope the election campaign is now over, and it is not yet time to panic.
We respect the choice of American people and our policy [...] is not going to change because of that.
Nato will be under pressure to disintegrate, the Russians will make trouble, 20 million people will lose their health insurance, climate change [policies] will be reversed, bank regulation will be liquidated. Do you want me to go on? Of course it's not Hitler. There are many varieties of fascism. I didn't say he was a Nazi although neo-Nazis are celebrating.
We will continue to cooperate with Russia because, at this particular phase of the process, we have gathered evidence to indicate that those behind this criminal group are nationalists from Russia, Russian citizens.
The organisers of this criminal group were nationalists from Russia whose initial premise and conclusion was that the government in Montenegro led by Milo Dukanovic cannot be changed in election and that it should be toppled by force. The plan was to stop Montenegro on its Euro-Atlantic path, especially to prevent it from entering Nato.
Some of our Afghan partners also died. Our service members were doing their part to help the Afghans secure their own country while protecting our homeland from those who would do us harm. On this difficult day, please keep their families, friends and teammates in your thoughts and prayers. We will honor their sacrifice by finishing our important mission in Afghanistan.
On behalf of all of U.S. Forces - Afghanistan, today's loss is heartbreaking and we offer our deepest condolences to the families and friends of our service members who lost their lives today. Our wounded soldiers are receiving the best medical care possible and we are keeping them and their families in our thoughts today, as well.
It is not a common event.
One good example against TTIP is that we will lose the protection against the use of forbidden chemicals in cosmetics in Europe: in Europe there are some 1,300 banned chemical products in cosmetics – while in the USA there are only eleven chemicals banned from cosmetics. An example is lead: in the USA it is still used in cosmetics such as in lipsticks… not like this one produced by us.
The main challenge is not individual events or deployments. It is the overall picture, where we see a substantial increase in Russia's capabilities at sea, in the air and on land; exercises with a more aggressive patterns. We will not mirror what Russia is doing. We are not in a Cold War situation.
Donald Trump says that NATO is obsolete, that it is not equipped to fight terrorism. Any thoughts on that?
Let's now turn to Hillary Clinton, she still believes in NATO but do you think she'll be more demanding of her allies?
Let's now turn to trade and particularly to TTIP. Obama won't have time to push for it, Trump would kill it. Clinton is going back on her word that she supports this particular agreement. Some European countries as you know are completely against it. So is TTIP dead?
We are standing here at the hottest spot of German history, of European history. NATO and Warsaw pact troops were looking at each other only two meters apart, here at this point.
It reminds me of the duty the American soldiers carried out here, in the tower for example. That they were watching the area for twenty four hours which you can see right now. And what they contributed to our peace and freedom. As long as they were here, the western people could sleep well at night.
We've got to do everything that we can to vacuum up intelligence from Europe, from the Middle East. That means we have to work more closely with our allies and that is something that Donald has been very dismissive of. We're working with NATO, the longest military alliance in the history of the world to really turn our attention to terrorism.
I am going to the elections. If only one political power wins, it will be very dangerous – because they will go ahead with reforms that suit them. I think it's important people's opinions are heard.
The concerns are not based on anything as our planes have not come near Aleppo for nine days. Our battle group is in the Mediterranean. Our ships have always had a presence there.
They're using all these tools that they have in their inventory to enhance the effect that they want to create on the battlefield.
It is obviously trying to signal, but it is not clear that we know how to understand those signals.
The alliance is more focused on the development and deepening of its policy of a comprehensive military and political containment of Russia. This vector is becoming more and more long-term.
This is still worrying and does nothing to contribute to the easing of tensions in our region. It affects all the countries around the Baltic Sea.
New imaginary threats are being created all the time, like the so-called Russian military threat. It's of course very profitable because: people can ask for bigger military budgets in their countries, or allies can be made to bend down in some superpowers' interests, or see NATO spread to get its infrastructure: military units and weapons closer to our borders.
I think it's important to understand that the NATO presence in the Aegean Sea adds value because it is a platform for enhanced cooperation between a non-EU NATO ally, Turkey, with Greece and improved cooperation between Turkey and the European Union.
So how are we going to thread that needle with, with the SDF and our NATO allies --Turkey? Turkey doesn't want to see us operating with the SDF anywhere, particularly in Raqqa.
We are concerned and I have expressed that very clearly about potential use of this battle group to increase Russia's ability and to be a platform for airstrikes against Syria. This is something I have conveyed very clearly before and I repeat those concerns today and I believe that all NATO allies are aware that this battle group can be used to conduct airstrikes against Aleppo and Syria.
One thing they will want to address is whether we all have the capacity to read Russia's behaviour satisfactorily. Russia is doing a lot of new, unfamiliar things; it's obviously trying to signal, but it's not clear that we know how to understand those signals.
It is each up to each nation to decide, as has been NATO policy for many years, but we are concerned about the potential use of this carrier group to increase attacks against civilians in Aleppo. All allies are aware of our concerns.
This [the Baltic force] is a credible deterrence, not to provoke a conflict, but to prevent conflict.
Bulgaria is a member of NATO and the EU, this is our strategic choice which has no alternative, but we should not look on Russia as an enemy.
These are two close friends of ours. In the case of Turkey, it's a NATO ally. And we want to keep everybody focused on the objective here, which is to defeat ISIS, because that is a threat to all three of us.
They didn't have positions set aside, so the newly trained ATACs were out guarding gates. We didn't foresee that problem when we started off.
If the ATAC hadn't been there, then there could have possibly been a couple civilians hurt from the strike.
We can take our coordinates and the enemy coordinates to prevent civilian casualties and hitting the wrong target. This is our duty, to save people's lives.
That's why, in my book, I suggest that the next president will convene all democratic leaders from the whole world to establish an alliance for freedom that can counter the still more aggressive autocrats like Mr. Putin.
Of course the United States shouldn't act alone as the world's policeman. You need someone to help you.
We have seen political confrontation between Russia and the West in the past 2-1/2 years escalate to military assertiveness and we do not see this ending anytime soon.
We believe this aggressive influencing from Russia aims at creating distrust between leaders and citizens, and to have us make decisions harmful to ourselves. It also aims to make citizens suspicious about the European Union, and to warn Finland over not joining NATO.
They, it is suspected, entered Montenegro with an intention to get their hands on automatic weapons and to carry, later in the evening, attacks on institutions, the police and representatives of the authorities, including top state officials.
To have a no-fly zone, you have to take out all of the air defense, many of which are located in populated areas. So our missiles, even if they are stand-off missiles, so we're not putting our pilots at risk – you're going to kill a lot of Syrians. So all of a sudden this intervention that people talk about so glibly becomes an American and NATO involvement where you take a lot of civilians.
Following the election I expect Montenegro to keep moving towards its European and Euro-Atlantic integration.
To get from 1.2 percent to 2 percent, we need to increase it by a huge amount.
This is not the Cold War, but we do not have the partnership we have been working on for years. We are in uncharted territory, we have never seen relations with Moscow like this before.
This shouldn't be a competition. We'll do it together. A strong Europe is good for NATO.
We believe that the Russian response, the moving of missiles, is an inappropriate response to NATO's activity.
We remain steadfast in our support for our NATO ally, Turkey, and reaffirm our commitment to continue working together to defeat all forms of terrorism.
Although we are leaving the EU we are going to fulfill our commitments to NATO, including to the European continent and you will also find us doing more internationally. You will also find us doing more with our key partners, especially the United States.
Leaving the EU does not mean we are stepping back from our commitment to the security of our continent. We will lead in NATO, the cornerstone of our defence, putting troops onto its eastern border next year. But we will go on blocking an EU Army, which would simply undermine NATO.
Across the Atlantic, we're refreshing NATO's nuclear playbook – to better integrate conventional and nuclear deterrence, to ensure we plan and train like we'd fight, and to deter Russia from thinking it can benefit from nuclear use in a conflict with NATO.
We've got so many young people graduating with debt who aren't able to get started in their careers, aren't able to do the jobs like I could do because they have to get a job that pays as much as possible to begin paying their debt down. So we should and we will make public colleges tuition free for families earning less than 125,000 dollars a year.
So we want NATO to be strong, which means we want more countries to follow the example of Poland. If every country in NATO made the same contributions as Poland, all of our allies would be more secure. And people would feel better.
We want to be strong, which means we want more countries to follow the example of Poland. If every country in NATO made the same contribution as Poland, all of our allies would be more secure. And people would feel even better about NATO.
You need some regulations for safety and environment. You need some regulations but we' re going to cutting tremendous amounts of red tape. As president I will honor Poland's sacrifices for freedom. We are committed to a strong Poland – very committed, totally committed – and a strong eastern Europe as a bulwark for security and liberty.
We agree Europe needs to step up to the challenges of terrorism and of migration. But we are going to continue to oppose any idea of an EU army or an EU army headquarters which would simply undermine NATO. NATO must remain a cornerstone of our defense and the defense of Europe.
I'm sure I'm not going to get credit for it–but that was largely because of what I was saying and my criticism of NATO.
There are member states who would like to see…a single set of forces. That looks and sounds to me like a European army and we would oppose that.
NATO wants adequate support and Britain sees some aspects of the EU's ambitions that are useful, say on terrorism and cyber security. We just need to avoid duplication.
It's part of a strike package of bombers deployed as part of a NATO exercise.
We must have a European headquarters and so we should work toward a common military force. This should be in complement with NATO.
I strongly condemn these consistent provocations and violations of binding U.N. Security Council resolutions which undermine regional and international security.
Poland's formal request is an important milestone toward becoming the 6th NATO Patriot country and the 14th Patriot partner nation.
Of course that worries us, and that's why it's good that the Germans are here for deterrence and to send a signal that NATO is strong and unified.
During battles in cities, the enemy's technological advantages fade away. The use of artillery and aviation is limited as in one street there might be enemy soldiers, but in another, your own soldiers.
We are absolutely, thoroughly, 100 percent committed to our NATO obligations including and especially Article 5. [T]he fact that you occasionally hear something from a presidential candidate in the other party, it's nothing [that] should be taken seriously, because I don't even think he understands what Article 5 is.
We are absolutely, thoroughly, 100 percent committed to our NATO obligations including and especially Article 5.
[T]he fact that you occasionally hear something from a presidential candidate in the other party, it's nothing [that] should be taken seriously, because I don't even think he understands what Article 5 is.
You'd obviously try to avoid that happening in the first place, you would build up a good dialogue with Russia to ask them and support them is respecting borders. We would try and introduce a de-militarisation of the borders between Russia, Ukraine and all the other countries down in the border between Russia and eastern Europe.
The memories of the loss of the loved ones are still fresh. I would like to add my condolences to the families of those whose lives were lost during the wars in the 1990s, including those whose lives were lost as the result of the NATO campaign.
Incident after incident proves again and again: Hillary Clinton lacks the judgment – as said by Bernie Sanders – stability and temperament and the moral character to lead our nation. [More] importantly, she also lacks the mental and physical stamina to take on ISIS and all of the many adversaries we face.
We will defeat radical Islamic terrorism just as we have defeated every threat we've faced at every age and before. He would "work closely with NATO" to defeat the Islamic State group.
The opportunist Russia-Turkey convergence will raise renewed concerns about Ankara's western ties but will not lead to a departure from NATO. Relations would only slowly return to normal. Russian economic sanctions will be lifted only gradually. (Although) a commitment to restart bilateral energy projects such as the Turkish Stream gas pipeline is likely (today).
I think the recognition is that big organisations and the countries cannot do that (protect their cyber security) alone. They need industry. We certainly need industry. We need their innovation, their expertise, their solutions.
At the July NATO Summit in Warsaw cyberspace was recognised as the alliance's fourth operational domain – alongside land, sea and air. At the same time the Alliance announced business opportunities worth 70 million euros for dealing with cyber threat. Now's the time for hi tech companies to offer their goods.
Because these solutions are countering the threats the whole world is facing. And NATO is no different from any other organisation.
I don't believe that relations between the two countries would become so close that Russia could provide Turkey with an alternative to the security partnership of NATO. Turkey is an important NATO partner, and it must remain so.
Make Chris Christie eat a worm just for laughs, disband NATO and make me some scrambled eggs on a gold plate. We're too late? The Chinese fleet is advancing? Just build another wall. Yes! In the ocean, loser.
OK -- well, he's there in a certain way. But I'm not there. You have Obama there. And frankly, that whole part of the world is a mess under Obama with all the strength that you're talking about and all of the power of NATO and all of this. In the meantime, he's going away. He takes Crimea.
I want our NATO partners to be clear about where we stand. This administration like every single administration, Republican and Democrat alike, since 1949, remains fully committed to the NATO alliance and to our security commitments.
The suggestion that Trump may consider abandoning a guarantee of protection to fellow NATO countries would in some ways indeed make NATO obsolete.
Donald Trump was asked if he would honor that guarantee. He said ... maybe, maybe not. The president is supposed to be the leader of the free world. Donald Trump apparently doesn't even believe in the free world.
Reporting has been sketchy. We're getting better at it with fuel and we're working on ammunition at the moment.
As a coalition, we have to have visibility on assets and we have no visibility with a manual-based system.
Several forms and papers have to be filled out to obtain ammunition and there has to be accountability for everything.
It's absurd to think that United States was somehow complicit or anyway connected to the events of Friday. (…) This is a NATO ally is a partner is a democratically elected government it is a strong democracy we stand with and stood with Turkey during that crisis.
Several voices have expressed concern that the March 2016 EU-Turkey deal on refugees might be in jeopardy in the wake of the coup attempt, especially as a mellowing of the country's anti-terrorism law (something the EU wants) is now out of the question in the post-coup context. What is more likely is that the EU and Turkey, which both have more vital concerns than visa liberalisation, will continue to implement core elements of the deal.
Turkey was always far from being a staunch ally of the anti-ISIL coalition and I don't think that will change in the post-coup situation.
If Erdoğan adopts the death penalty for the coup plotters that will obviously poison relations with the EU, but certainly the United States cannot have the death penalty be the red line because many US states have it. So while John Kerry might not lecture Erdoğan on the death penalty, he will lecture him on violations of democracy, rule of law and things like beating soldiers who are alleged to be part of the plot.
The cracks between Turkey and the west is not good for the fight against terrorism because you need a close relation as possible from the strategic allies, rather than bickering. So there's no real good that's going to come out of this.
Reintroduction of the death penalty would prevent successful negotiations to join the EU.
He's going to become much more paranoid. This happens almost always with coup attempts that fail, that there is nearly always a subsequent refocusing on the domestic consolidation of power and that takes the regime's focus away from foreign policy battles and fights.
You very often have to make very unsavoury alliances [in geopolitics], whether that's a good thing or not is extremely debatable. But Turkey is in a geostrategically-important location at a time when that location is exceptionally important for international security between terrorism, the collapse of Syria and the refugee crisis.
Turkey's relations with the EU have been dying for a long time. It just needs a small push to collapse totally. But if the regime reinstates the death penalty, that will be the final nail in the coffin.
Leaders try to decapitate their military and weaken it to make sure no individual general or force within the armed forces has an independent power base and that's not good for NATO's goals because it ultimately undermines their strategic ability to project power in Syria and against terrorism.
NATO wants Turkey's military to be as powerful as possible, because it's a partner that's extremely strategically important for the fight in Syria. But at the same time Erdoğan has now seen the coup is a threat to his power base and his regime's stability and survival.
No country can become a EU member state if it introduces the dead penalty, that is very clear in our 'aquis' as we call it. […] this is no excuse to take the country away from fundamental rights and rule of law and we will be extremely vigilant on that.
Obviously, Nato has a requirement with respect to democracy and Nato will indeed measure very carefully what is happening.
I have just spoken to the Turkish foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. I am following events in Turkey closely and with concern. I call for calm and restraint, and full respect for Turkey's democratic institutions and its constitution. Turkey is a valued NATO Ally.
This is war. The NATO military alliance should be doing more to get "rid of ISIS. We're dealing with people without uniforms ... we are allowing people into our country – we have no idea where they are coming from. They have no paperwork, no documentation. This may be the great Trojan Horse of all time.
There was not a meeting of minds today.
There is no reason to develop such military activity like we face today and what NATO is doing and, of course, we believe that it does not contribute to security so it's not about transparency. This is about the direction in which NATO is moving in military terms and this is very worrisome, very worrisome development.
Allies and Russia have profound and persistent disagreements on the crisis. (…) but it was an opportunity to clarify our positions and to exchange views on the crisis in Ukraine.
There was not a meeting of minds today. Allies and Russia have profound and persistent disagreements on the crisis. (...) but it was an opportunity to clarify our positions and to exchange views on the crisis in Ukraine.
Transponders are important, but they are only one element of a broader picture related to air safety. The basic thing is safe behavior, to fly in a safe and professional way.
Spain is a strong NATO ally, we're grateful for Spain's many decades of hosting U.S. forces, and we're major trading partners. That's why the United States is deeply committed to maintaining our relationship with a strong, unified Spain.
Poroshenko also discussed with his western colleagues the situation in Eastern Ukraine. Moving forward with the Minsk process requires Russian participation. But the President can be proud that NATO has never provided to any of it's partners such a complex and expansive aid package as it's promised to Kyiv – in addition to political support.
We're moving forward with the most significant reinforcement of our collective defense any time since the Cold War.
An independent, sovereign and stable Ukraine, firmly committed to democracy and the rule of law, is key to Euro-Atlantic security.
We are very close (to the target) and I'm certain that we will reach that level.
We are ready to stay ... that's the reason we are ready to stay beyond 2016.
All the rhetoric in Warsaw just yells of a desire almost to declare war on Russia. They only talk about defense, but actually are preparing for offensive operations.
We do not seek confrontation. We continue to seek a constructive dialogue with Russia. Russia is our biggest neighbour, it is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and it plays an important role in security challenges in and around Europe.
I cannot exclude that tactical nuclear weapons already exist in the Kaliningrad region.
The security of America and Europe is indivisible. Here in Europe, we'll continue to support Ukraine as it undertakes important economic and political reforms. The U.S. and EU are united in our commitment to maintaining sanctions on Russia until they fully implement its obligations under the Minsk (Ukraine ceasefire) agreement.
There is no freedom in Europe without trans-Atlantic solidarity. We are taking care of the unity of the Western political community, and that is key.
This is a defining moment for our security. NATO is responding with speed and determination.
For our nations to be safe, it's not enough to keep our defenses strong, we must help to make our partners stronger. Training local forces is often our best weapon against violent extremism.
As difficult as it will be, I am confident that the UK and the EU will be able to agree on an orderly transition to a new relationship, as all our countries stay focused on ensuring financial stability and growing the global economy. And, while the relationship between the UK and the EU will change, it is worth remembering what will not change. The special relationship between the US and the UK will endure.
NATO countries are feeling a threat from Russia. On the agenda of the summit are measures not only of deterrence, but also of collective defence. A Moscow envoy has already described them as threat to peace in Europe.
The actions of Russia in the Ukraine crisis has deeply unsettled our Eastern neighbours. If the validity of the law and the sacredness of borders is challenged in words and actions, then trust in NATO is lost. And especially our allies in the East have been deeply unsettled by this. They are in need of clear reassurance through the alliance.
Our message is that we are ready to defend all allies and that an attack on one ally would be an attack on the whole alliance. And this is deterrence, this is defence, and this is also important for stability in Europe, that NATO continues to be strong when it comes to deterrence and defence. NATO does not seek confrontation, we don't want a new cold war, we don't want a new arms race, so therefore we continue to strive for more political dialogue with Russia, to reduce tensions and to develop a better relationship.
The main message is that NATO is adapting to a new and more challenging security environment, to a more dangerous world, and we are doing so by reinforcing our collective defences in Europe but also working more with partners in the Middle East, and North Africa, to help them stabilize their own countries, if they are more stable, we are more secure.
The UK decision to leave the European Union of course changes the UK's relationship with the European Union, but it does not change UK's position inside NATO. The UK will continue to be a strong and committed ally in the alliance and that is important because UK accounts for around one quarter of defence spending among European NATO allies and therefore this is important that they will continue as a strong ally inside the Alliance and we will continue to develop our cooperation with the European Union, that is one of the main things we will address at our summit in Warsaw.
What NATO is doing is that we are addressing the root causes by our presence in Afghanistan, our training of Iraqi forces, our presence in Jordan, in Tunisia, and also of course our presence in Turkey, bordering the turmoil and the instability in Iraq and Syria. And then we are also supporting the coalition fighting ISIL, so this is partly about military efforts, NATO's playing a key role, but also civilian efforts, where the European Union and others are playing the leading role.
The EU will not be weak. The EU will continue to be important for the whole of Europe. We face the same challenges and the same threats, but neither the European Union nor NATO possesses all the answers, all the tools, but together we can provide a very comprehensive answer to the challenges we see around Europe today.
There can be no justification for terrorism. NATO Allies stand in solidarity with Turkey, united in our determination to fight terrorism in all its forms.
I like the idea of using Nato and also neighbours that aren't in Nato and take them out. You gotta take them out.
Today's problems, if we can summarise them in a quite simple way, are: migration, terrorism and cybersecurity. Around these three big problems, a defence strategy should be constructed. When I talk about NATO's southern flank, I'm talking about migration and terrorism. But I don't have the impression that there's a desire to address these priorities.
That's unclear: there is no solid basis on which to develop a rule. The main characteristic of a cyber attacks is the fact that its author is concealed and has a good chance of never being found. Today, we are saying 'we can respond to attacks', without saying how we identify the attacker.
No doubt. It says that when a NATO member feels its security is under threat, this is the correct route. The process should be followed. I don't think this consultation on the danger from cyber space has ever taken place. Article 4 also logically comes before Article 5. But all these advances forward can be seen in the context of positioning [Russian President Vladimir] Putin as an enemy, because obviously this this issue that has been raised because they think that the Russians are very aggressive in the cyber sector.
Neither Russia nor Ukraine are NATO members, so I don't understand why NATO should react like this.
Even the diplomatic route should start from a basis that is not present today. If I complain, I have to lay out the reasons behind my complaint and be able to justify them. This basis is not available today. We may have suspicions, indications, but nothing more. And a diplomatic protest founded on conjecture loses all its strength, and can have no other outcome than irritating, which is exactly what's happening now with Russia.
It's put the cat among the pigeons. First you should consider the argument in depth; consult the member countries, develop a strategy and after having established a strategy to fight against cyber attacks you then need to define the rules of engagement, which obviously should be coherent with the founding principles of our alliance. Instead of doing this, they just jumped to the conclusion that a cyber attack on a member country could justify an armed response against the culprit.
Unfortunately, the real problems affecting not only NATO countries, but more or less the entire Western world and some others, will probably not figure prominently in Warsaw [for the NATO Heads of Government meeting, July 8-9].
Well, for now it's just an idea. I see it as one of the many, perhaps too many provocations towards Putin. They decided to include this because Putin – like everyone else, without exception – is preparing to face, and even have offensive capacity in the cyber sector. But nothing more than this.
There always has been. Unfortunately, instead of correcting this imbalance and assuming that we were right in saying 'the world will change from the south', there's actually an opposite trend, a recycling of the old logic, old habits, seeing an East-West confrontation as NATO's main mission.
The Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence.
There's just not going to be an enormous amount of attention of policy bandwidth given to the migration crisis, fighting ISIS, or focusing on continued ceasefire violations in Ukraine and maintaining sanctions against Russia. It comes down to when we need the UK and its leadership, whether in the Security Council or NATO, its attentions will be focussed domestically.
As it defines the next chapter in its relationship with the EU, I know that the United Kingdom's position in NATO will remain unchanged. The U.K. will remain a strong and committed NATO ally, and will continue to play its leading role in our alliance.
Today, as we face more instability and uncertainty, NATO is more important than ever as a platform for cooperation among European allies, and between Europe and North America. A strong, united and determined NATO remains an essential pillar of stability in a turbulent world, and a key contributor to international peace and security.
But while the U.K.'s relationship with the EU will change, one thing that will not change is the special relationship that exists between our two nations. That will endure. The EU will remain one of our indispensable partners. Our NATO alliance will remain a cornerstone of global security.
One thing that will not change is the special relationship between our two countries. The U.K.'s membership in NATO was also important.
Defense in line with the NATO treaty starts with the countries. Article 3 is talking about the need for every country to do anything the country is possible to provide for its own defense.
The important thing is that we need the NATO/Russia Council to have a chance of political dialogue open with Russia and especially when tensions are high. It is important that we talk, that we meet and that we do whatever we can to prevent misunderstandings, miscalculations, and try to reduce tensions.
It's up to the people of Great Britain to decide whether to remain or leave. But what I can do is tell you what matters for NATO. A strong U.K. in a strong Europe is good for the U.K., but it's also good for NATO.
Since the United Kingdom is the biggest European NATO ally when it comes to forces, military capabilities, it really matters what the U.K. does.
The U.K. is Europe's pre-eminent military power and crucial to U.S.-European burden-sharing within NATO.
European integration has had absolutely nothing to do with peace in Europe since World War II; that has been the achievement of NATO.
Deterrence of the Russians will be more in the assurance that if they were to attack, they would come into contact with NATO forces almost immediately, and that therefore the Russians should not doubt NATO's determination to fight. For that, you don't need large numbers of troops.
There are divisions within NATO. Some allies feel the focus should be on the south.
He, very early on, allied himself with Putin's policies. I mean to pull out of NATO for goodness sakes. Right? And he furthermore has praised Putin, he seems to have this bizarre attraction to dictators – including Putin.
We are looking into how we can increase our forward presence of NATO forces in the east an part of the alliance, combined with enhanced ability to reinforce if needed. We will discuss how NATO can do more to project stability and at the same time address how NATO can continue to adapt to a more assertive Russia to find the right balance between defence and dialogue.
Europe, and by extension NATO, is facing a range of new and complex security challenges. Addressing these challenges will require a more capable NATO alliance, one that continues to evolve and adapt, to threats both old and new.
It is part of the military and political containment of Russia. These decisions by NATO can only exacerbate an already difficult situation. the move would hinder efforts to repair ties between Russia and the alliance.
As long as Iran continues to develop and deploy ballistic missiles, the United States will work with its allies to defend NATO.
Donald Trump is radioactive. He is a sexist and a racist. He praises tyrants. He criticizes our NATO allies. Every day since he's been declared the winner, I've had Republicans coming up to me, saying, I'm voting for the Democrat.
We now have the capability to protect NATO in Europe. The Iranians are increasing their capabilities and we have to be ahead of that. The system is not aimed against Russia. the system will soon be handed over to NATO command.
The Ministry of Defense is taking a number of measures aimed at preventing NATO from building-up on Russia's borders. Two new military divisions will be formed in the Western Military District by the end of the year, and one in the Southern Military District. At the moment we are building bases for these forces.
I think we actually are in a worse situation than when we were in office, which was during the 1990's when there was a great deal of hope and excitement about the end of the Cold War – looking at how Europe could in fact be a part of NATO and the European Union, and a sense that the United Nations could operate. I think it was really a time of a lot of hope and excitement.
We're here today to demonstrate our capability to take the F-22 anywhere needed in NATO or across Europe. We want to demonstrate our credibility and capability to bring the F-22 to Europe and actually fly the aircraft and train with our NATO allies, via that, it should deter aggression throughout NATO as well.
We need to stay nimble and make sure our forces are inter-operable and invest in new capabilities like cyber defence and missile defence. That's why every NATO member should be contributing its full share, 2 percent of GDP, towards our common security – something that doesn't always happen and, I'll be honest, sometimes Europe has been complacent about its own defence.
Even as European countries make important contributions against ISIL, Europe, including NATO, can still do more.
Based on information NATO has provided, Turkey is taking action to break the business model of human traffickers. And figures from different international organizations confirm that the numbers of migrants and refugees crossing the Aegean Sea are now going significantly down. It confirms that our collective efforts are making a difference. We need to remain flexible because the people smugglers can shift their routes very rapidly.
The NATO-Russia Council will discuss the crisis in and around Ukraine and the need to fully implement the Minsk Agreements. We will discuss military activities, with particular focus on transparency and risk reduction. We will also address the security situation in Afghanistan, including regional terrorist threats. This meeting is the continuation of our political dialogue, as agreed by NATO Heads of State and Government.
We are working with Russia to hold another meeting of the (NATO-Russia) Council shortly after the summit, where transparency and risk reduction should be an important topic.
NATO continues to be the lynchpin, the cornerstone, of our collective defense and U.S. security policy. It is because of the strength of NATO and the transatlantic partnership -- this transatlantic alliance -- that I'm confident that despite these choppy waters we will continue to be able to underscore and underwrite the peace and security and prosperity that has been the hallmark of the transatlantic relationship for so many decades.
There are some NATO countries that meet that and some that don't.
Either they pay up, including for past deficiencies, or they have to get out. And if it breaks up NATO, it breaks up NATO.
Well, first of all, he united the pro-choice and pro-life groups, which I don't know how he did that. But think about this: he said he would use nuclear weapons, maybe in Europe, that we would leave Nato, he would have a supreme court justice who would have to investigate Hillary's emails, that would be one of the requirements for being a justice. Then he said we should destroy the Geneva conventions.
This Army implementation plan continues to demonstrate our strong and balanced approach to reassuring our NATO allies and partners in the wake of an aggressive Russia in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. This means our allies and partners will see more capability – they will see a more frequent presence of an armored brigade with more modernized equipment in their countries.
I think NATO is obsolete. NATO was done at a time you had the Soviet Union, which was obviously larger – much larger than Russia is today. I'm not saying Russia is not a threat. But we have other threats. We have the threat of terrorism. And NATO doesn't discuss terrorism. NATO's not meant for terrorism. NATO doesn't have the right countries in it for terrorism.
The way to respond to terrorist attacks is not weakness. It's not unilateral and preemptive surrender. Abandoning Europe, withdrawing from NATO, as Trump suggests, is preemptive surrender.
Ukraine is a country that affects us far less than it affects other countries in NATO, and yet we're doing all of the lifting. They're not doing anything. And I say: 'Why is it that Germany's not dealing with NATO on Ukraine? Why is it that other countries that are in the vicinity of Ukraine, why aren't they dealing? Why are we always the one that's leading, potentially the third world war with Russia.
We reaffirm our strong partnership with our NATO ally Turkey in combatting the shared threat of terrorism.
NATO says its mission will be limited with information gathering. It doesn't want its soldiers or sailors to be seen herding families into refugee centres. The Secretary General didn't answer a question over whether they would rescue sinking boats.
The counter-ISIL coalition will meet in these headquarters on Thursday, but NATO insists it has nothing to do with its plans and only provides a venue. NATO seems to be reluctant to go beyond its remit.
We regard this infringement which came despite all our warnings in Russian and in English as an effort by Russia to escalate the crisis in the region. If Russia continues the violations of Turkey's sovereign rights, it will be forced to endure the consequences. These irresponsible steps do not help the Russian Federation, NATO-Russia relations or regional and global peace. On the contrary they are detrimental.
NATO membership is good for Montenegro, it is good for Europe and it's good for the whole alliance.
We stand in solidarity with Turkey and support the territorial integrity of our NATO Ally, Turkey. I look forward to further contacts between Ankara and Moscow and I call for calm and de-escalation.
We are continuing as planned with the development of the missile defence system in Europe. That is part of our deterrence and the reason why NATO wants to have and continues to have strong collective defence is not because we want to fight the war, but it is because we want to prevent the war.
Over the course of this exercise, NATO was conducting clearly offensive operations, it is training to attack. What does it tell us about the strategy of NATO? Is it evolving?
We can not rely on internal military investigation by the US, NATO and Afghan forces. Today, we are fighting back for the respect of the Geneva Convention. As doctors we are fighting back for the sake of patients. We need you as members of the public to stand with us to insist that even wars have rules.
The (NATO) package itself is a continuation of the measures which were initiated at the previous summit in Wales. There have been no major changes.
But the President can be proud that NATO has never provided to any of it's partners such a complex and expansive aid package as it's promised to Kyiv – in addition to political support.
Taking tough measures against Russia Nato is also keeping a channel of dialogue open to prevent accidents. But the Russian representative to NATO said that the next Nato-Russia Council meeting on 13th of July should discuss the decisions of the Summit – meaning they should be questioned. Another Russian observer described the situation after the Warsaw Summit as a cold war.
This process will move us forward together. Without political differences and at the same time with very close cooperation with the United States, the European Union and NATO. Therefore esteemed lawmakers I call upon all of you to vote in favour of creating the special court.
Terrorism poses a direct threat to the security of NATO countries and to international stability and prosperity. NATO is playing its part in addressing these challenges. All allies are part and contribute to the global coalition against ISIL.
It is right and timely that we hold this meeting today to address the instability on Turkey's doorstep and on Nato's border. Nato is following developments very closely and we stand in strong solidarity with our ally, Turkey.
During the operations that we conducted against both Daesh (ISIL) and PKK in Syria and in Iraq we informed the UN Security Council, as well as the UN Secretary General and the members. (...). We expect solidarity and support from our NATO allies regarding the security threats and Daesh is our common enemy.
Overall NATO defence investment is expected to fall by 1.5% in 2015, so we must do more to increase investment in our defence, as the challenges to our security have increased.
Secondly, in terms of security, Turkey is anchored to the West and to NATO. That is a reality that will not change anytime soon and must be taken into account.
I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO. I think some countries are simply taking advantage of people's fears with regard to Russia.
Well, what happened? NATO instantly moved into East Germany and then Clinton came along and expanded NATO right to the borders of Russia. Now, the new Ukrainian government, the government established after the overthrow of the preceding one, now the parliament voted 300 to 8 or something like that, to move to join NATO.
The practical focus is to begin developing the road map to the next NATO summit, which will take place in Warsaw in July 2016, a summit which will presumably be the capstone and last summit for the Obama administration.
I think it is very important that in the span of the next government we don't exclude the possibility of seeking NATO membership in a similar way in which we excluded it for this government; it is also a security-political decision to keep that option open.
The situation is critical and it's urgent to find a solution and therefore I and NATO give our full support to this renewed initiative.
That is about enhancing our NATO response force. The current size is about 13,000. I expect that they will decide on a force that will be around 30,000. And part of that enhanced NATO response force, I expect will be the establishment of this spearhead force, which I expect will be of a size of around 5,000.
This is a tragedy which affects the whole NATO family. I express my heartfelt condolences to the loved ones and the nations of those who lost their lives, and I wish a speedy recovery to the injured.
NATO member states are there at present and are performing this function. It is necessary to help them, even though we will not be fighting there ourselves. Let them stay there and fight.
We said quite clearly that NATO is not the answer for Georgia. It's the EU, and a deeper relationship with the EU which is one solution.
We have established a Nato training mission in Afghanistan to oversee higher level training for the Afghan National Army and training and mentoring for the Afghan police. We will provide more trainers and more mentors for the Afghan police. We will deploy the forces necessary to support the upcoming elections in Afghanistan.
I think that this draft law which abandons the non-aligned status and aspires to join NATO is counterproductive. Ukrainian politicians openly say it will solve the deep crisis of the Ukrainian state but this is just an illusion.
In the six and a half years of the trial, he has proven so many things that I think that, if there is justice, and if The Hague tribunal respected that, and if the Hague tribunal were not just an emissary of the NATO alliance, he would be released.
We must work through coalitions of common interest like NATO.
In the Rapid Trident exercises, NATO and Ukrainian troops will train in how to react to an ambush and convoy operations, amongst other things. It will raise the combat capability of the Ukrainian army and may be used in operations in Donbas.
Again, NATO is focused on defence and protection of our allies. That's why we have deployed Patriot missiles to Turkey to protect Turkey against possible missile attacks from Syria. But, of course in general, the situation in the region is a matter of grave concern. It is publicly known the Iraqi government has requested assistance from individual NATO allies.
We have enhanced air policing over the three Baltic states, deployed naval vessels to the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea, we have conducted more exercises in Poland and the Baltic states. So, at sea, in the air, on the ground you see more NATO presence. It's not offensive, it's purely defensive with the aim to ensure effective protection of our allies.
Actually we have spent more then 20 years trying to build a constructive relationship with Russia. But I have to say that Russia doesn't behave as a partner. And we can see in the Russian military documents that they consider NATO an adversary, so of course we have to adapt to that.
It's not NATO as an alliance, but individual NATO allies are engaged. What you see now is really how much the international community as such is concerned about this situation and the spread of extremism and terrorism. It requires a unified response from the international community across traditional lines of division.
Yeah, but we never had any intention to deploy NATO troops to Crimea. So it's a very very bad excuse for what is an illegal and illegitimate annexation of Crimea into the Russian Federation. There is no excuse. Russia is in blatant breach of all its international commitments and also in breach of the fundamental principles of NATO-Russia cooperation.
As for NATO's plans to increase its presence in the territories of its members in Eastern European states, our stand is that Russian-NATO relations are also regulated by certain rules. According to these, there must be no additional constant military presence on Eastern European territory.
We know that Ukraine, as well as Georgia back in 2008, toyed with the idea of NATO membership. And NATO membership was dangled in front of them, even though the prospect of that was never particularly realistic. But again it's this threat of NATO emerging right on Russia's doorstep that pushed things off the cliff. And that's resulted in Crimea, in the annexation or reunification as the Russians and Crimeans would term that. But on the part of Russia it was a defensive step.
NATO did not provide us with what we want. If NATO wanted to free Misrata they could have done that before. We don't want to bomb in order not to kill civilians. If NATO waited for another week, Misrata would have been finished and there would be no civilians. Its people would have been killed and the international community would bear the responsibility of such a crime.
NATO did not provide us with what we want. If NATO wanted to free Misrata they could have done that before.
I think it is completely unrealistic to consider that we can influence NATO's course, even if we're reintegrated into the central command. Because only the naive believe … that NATO is an organisation where things are actually discussed. There are no discussions: the Americans decide.
Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters, and drug traffickers and criminal elements and local war lords remain active and committed to destroying democracy in Afghanistan. Defeating them will require the full commitment of our alliance. For NATO to succeed, its commanders on the ground must have the resources and flexibility they need to do their jobs.
The EU is where our future challenges lie. NATO membership was dictated more by our past fears, but both represent our integration into the western world's institutions.
We will enter a bloody war and thousands and thousands of Libyans will die if the United States or NATO enters.
NATO-Russia cooperation is not a matter of choice. It is a matter of necessity. Both NATO and Russia have a wealth of experience in missile defence. We should now work to combine this experience to our mutual benefit.
Our demands are for Nato and the Americans to leave our country as soon as possible. We Afghans must come together to choose our path and forge the destiny of Afghanistan. We must end this deadlock.
NATO is trying to begin talking with Russia about the ways of reducing the tension with Ukraine. If this attempt at dialogue fails, Russia will face an increased threat of international sanctions. They will be discussed here when EU leaders meet here on Thursday.
We are continuously reminding the rest of the world that if NATO can engineer an attack on Libya and spend billions of dollars to drive out Gaddafi, they can spend a little of that to save the dying people in the Horn of Africa.
Russia has said that it will oppose Ukrainian membership of NATO with all means at its disposal, this is a very serious issue for Russia. What is on the agenda here is how to accommodate the security interests of all those countries – Russia, Ukraine and NATO members – in some new arrangement which provides both for the physical security and the economic prosperity.
The overall assessment shows that NATO has been unable to defeat the Taliban. Instead, they have regrouped and expanded their territory, intensifying attacks against NATO and the government.
The PYD (Kurdish Democratic Union Party) is for us, the same as the PKK (Kurdistan Workers' Party); it is also a terror organisation. It would be wrong for the United States – with whom we are friends and allies in NATO – to expect us to say 'Yes' to such support – supplying arms to a terrorist organisation. We can't say 'yes' to that.
Well, that's interesting, some of the rebels have been saying that. The Russians and the Chinese contracts - and they were very late in the game here – but they do have a foothold; the Chinese National Oil Company and Gazprom, for example, did have some licenses. I think they did, however, not veto the UN move to secure safety for civilians. But at the same time, they did complain about NATO overstepping the UN mandate. Yes, I think, it's obvious that the Europeans will be advantaged. It's the closest market, it's where all the business is to be done. And I think they will pursue that line.
Nato is absolutely determined to continue its operations as long as there is a threat against Libyan civilians. And it's impossible to imagine that that threat will disappear with Gaddafi in power.
France does not think that, in the current context, military intervention by NATO powers would be well-received on the southern shores of the Mediterranean. It would be counterproductive. That said, given the actions that have been carried out by Colonel Gaddafi, we must put ourselves in a position to act. That's why we've given our permission to the planning of an exclusion zone over Libya.
I doubt very much that President Reagan would have even imagined the world that we see today. A Europe whole, free, and at peace. A Europe in which we enjoy friendship and alliance with the former captive states in the transatlantic alliance called NATO.
Iraq is not a NATO mission, it's not a price to pay. There are moral obligations certainly to do things if you're a democracy. The decision to send troops to Iraq, and we are in operations elsewhere, are the decisions of a sovereign state and not because we have to pay anything to anyone.
If this military machine is not stopped, it will lead to greater numbers of dead and wounded. Planned exercises by NATO forces in Poland and the Baltic countries do not foster normalisation of the situation surrounding Ukraine, either.
This is the president who lost 20 per cent of Georgian territory, who brought Russian military bases back to our soil, who really stopped Georgia's nearest future aspirations to be a member of NATO.
It comes at a very important time when European Union and Russia, and Russia-Nato are rethinking, restructuring their relationship. So the coming summit is more about the EU-Atlantic, Eurasian security environment and how the Russian initiatives on European security will be viewed, and there has already been much progress on this and I think the summit comes in a positive light for all these developments. Countries now are recognizing that there is a need for a multilateral approach to addressing common challenges and threats.
First of all let me stress that I don't foresee any further role for NATO. NATO already plays its part as a forum for consultations among allies and we have deployed Patriot missiles to ensure effective defence and protection of the Turkish population and the Turkish territory.
NATO has always had a big role to play in Europe, despite the new operations much further away from the borders of Europe but it's always had a role to play. But I think the positioning of the Europeans and the European Union itself will be instrumental – whether member states decide themselves to really act in building a real defence policy for Europe or if this crisis in Ukraine shows how relevant NATO still is for European defence and if more of their capacity actually goes to NATO.
There was also a series of secret agreements within NATO. This platform served the CIA in Europe, allowing it to move around easily without any interference.
The intended target during last night's air strike in Tripoli was a military missile site. However, from our initial assessment of the facts it appears that one weapon did not strike the intended target due to a weapons systems failure. This technical failure may have caused a number of civilian casualties. NATO regrets the loss of innocent civilian lives.
I am not saying that (NATO) soldiers should come and chase these Russian troops out from our territory. But a series of measures should be worked out to make it impossible (for Russia) to commit without punishment this sort of aggressive action against its neighbours.
I have taken the initiative along with my British colleague to bring together a contact group in London next Tuesday. This includes all the countries in the coalition, as well as the African Union, the Arab League, and all the European countries involved, to make it clear that the political leadership of the operation is not NATO, but this contact group.
This may cause a perception amongst the public that it will escalate into a larger conflict. This breach of border will probably be reviewed by NATO officials and they may make a statement on that and warn Syria not to repeat it. So I don't expect any retaliation by Syria.
NATO is well suited to coordinating this international effort and ensuring that all participating nations are working effectively together toward our shared goals. Gaddafi's troops have been pushed back, but they remain a serious threat to the safety of the people.
NATO certainly needs to make a bigger investment in Afghanistan if it's to remain committed. But bigger investment probably has to come in civil areas, it has to come in military logistics, and has to come in military intelligence. The idea of just putting new troops on the ground, infantry as it were, to try and solve this problem is not going to work. The US government is looking hard at a new civilian surge, NATO should look also at a new civilian surge.
I hope we will earn positive remarks from Brussels, which will enable Macedonia to continue on its path to the EU and NATO.
This is the place ( Lask Air base) where you can clearly see a lasting Polish-American alliance within NATO.
As NATO ministers look at how to boost the quality of defence in Europe without violating agreements with Russia, they say Russia itself has violated these agreements by intervening in Ukraine. A decision on increasing the quantity of forces in the region could be taken at the NATO summit in September in Wales.
While he will no longer be the commander, the approach he helped put in place is the right one. The strategy continues to have NATO support and our forces will continue to carry it out.
Afghans are confident that General Petraeus will even do much better than General McChrystal because McChrystal had some weaknesses when it came, for example, to his relation with the Afghan government and with the rest of NATO countries.
We have not agreed to start handing over the lead, the conditions are not yet right. The Afghan security forces are not yet strong enough and I must also stress that transition when it happens does not mean NATO forces leave.
It costs about 50 times more to support a NATO soldier in Afghanistan than it costs to support an Afghan soldier.
I think the price to pay if we did not ensure a high capability of the Afghan security forces would be even higher. Security is priceless. But our planning assumption is around 4 billion US dollars a year. And I would expect NATO allies and ISAF partners to pay their fair share. This summit is not a pledging conference but nevertheless we have already seen a number of concrete announcements and based on that I am very optimistic about fundraising for the Afghan security forces.
At that time assurances about Eastern Europe could not be given. Because those countries were still members of the Warsaw Pact. But even when the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist, the question of the accession of these countries to NATO was never raised.
Ministers are satisfied with the cooperation over Libya and believe Europe is now safer. However Nato is worried about the threat reappearing from the East if the withdrawal from Afghanistan leaves conflict in its wake.