NATO is reportedly working towards the creation of an expeditionary force composed of 10,000 troops from seven different member states as a result of escalating tensions with Russia over the conflict in Ukraine.
According to the Financial Times, the force’s creation will be spearheaded by Britain and involve contributions from Denmark, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Norway, and the Netherlands. Canada is also interested in joining the group, but it’s not known what its final decision will be.
Although no formal announcement has been made, British Prime Minister David Cameron is expected to declare its formation at the upcoming NATO summit in Wales on September 4th.
Many specifics have yet to be worked out or announced, but planners are reportedly implementing ways to increase the number of soldiers involved even more if necessary. Air and naval units will be integrated into the group, as well as ground troops led by British commanders.
As noted by the Times, the creation of the force comes as a response to Russia’s involvement in the ongoing Ukrainian crisis, with the ultimate goal being to “create a fully functioning, division-sized force for rapid deployment and regular, frequent exercises.” NATO has accused Russia of deploying more than 1,000 troops into Ukraine to bolster separatists in the eastern part of the country.
Russia, however, insists that it does not have troops operating inside of Ukraine and has dismissed NATO’s assertions.
Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko has said Russian forces have invaded his country, with Kiev calling for an emergency EU and UN meeting.
Ditching a planned trip to Turkey on Thursday (26 August), Poroshenko in a TV address in the rain in front of his jet said that: “I have made a decision to cancel my working visit … due to a sharp aggravation of the situation in the Donetsk region [in east Ukraine], particularly in Amvrosiivka and Starobeshevo, as Russian troops have actually been introduced into Ukraine”.
He noted that he will convene a special meeting of Ukraine's security council, the NSDC.
He also called for snap talks by the UN Security Council, noting: “The world must provide an assessment of the sharp aggravation of the situation”.
Ukraine’s prime minister, Aresniy Yatsenyuk, in a separate TV statement, said: “It’s quite difficult for us to fight with Russia and its army. We urge the EU and the US to freeze all Russian assets until Russia pulls back its forces”.
Ukraine’s ambassador to the EU, Konstantin Yeliseyev, noted in a communique that EU leaders at their summit on Saturday in Brussels should devote a special session to Ukraine, adding: “Solidarity … should materialise in further resolute significant sanctions [against Russia] and large-scale military and technical assistance to Ukraine”.
Russian forces already invaded Ukraine when Russia seized Crimea in March.
A diplomat from one eastern European EU country said: “Now there is a direct Russian military invasion, so the EU should react accordingly. The possibility of further sanctions will be discussed”.
Edgars Rinkevics, the foreign minister of Latvia, tweeted: “UN must react accordingly, this is war”.
For its part, the EU foreign service has said foreign ministers will hold talks on Ukraine at an informal meeting in Milan this weekend.
He added that EU leaders will discuss Ukraine on Saturday evening and that Poroshenko may be invited to join them depending how events unfold.
The plight of dozens of UN peacekeepers in Syria remained “very, very fluid” Friday, the secretary-general’s spokesman said, as talks aimed at freeing them stretched into a second day, with al-Sharq al-Awsat suggesting Qatar may help negotiate their release.
Some radio contact has been made with the 72 peacekeepers from the Philippines who have been restricted to their positions, Stephane Dujarric told reporters. Another 44 peacekeepers from Fiji remain detained.
The UN has not said exactly who is holding the peacekeepers, whose mission monitors a 1974 disengagement accord between Syria and Israel. Various Syrian rebel groups have been engaged in intense fighting with the Syrian military in and near the Golan Heights.
Dujarric said the peacekeepers were being held by “non-state armed actors” who identify as the al-Qaida-linked Nusra Front.
He said talks continue “with a wide range of parties within Syria” and UN member states who may have influence with them. Details remained sketchy, he added.
“Those who are being held have food and water for some time,” Dujarric said. “At this very point, it is not an extreme concern.”
The events began Thursday morning on the Syrian side of the Golan Heights, an area divided between Israel and Syria.
Tikoitoga said three vehicles filled with about 150 armed rebels converged on the Fijian camp at about 7:30 a.m.
He said the rebels demanded the Fijian soldiers leave within 10 minutes and insisted they board the rebel vehicles. The Fijians were then taken by the rebels to an unknown location. He said he’s been told they were later transported back to their original post.
UN peacekeepers have escaped Syria and entered Israel, Arab media reported Saturday. It was not immediately clear of which nationality the said peacekeepers are.
Meanwhile, Syrian rebels holding dozens of Fijian UN peacekeepers hostage attacked Filipino troops in the Golan Heights on Saturday, Philippine officials said.
Philippine peacekeepers at one UN encampment were attacked, but those at another were "extricated," Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin told reporters in a series of text messages, adding that the attack started early Saturday Syrian time.
Philippine military spokesman Lt. Col. Ramon Zagala told reporters, "There is an ongoing firefight, but all Filipinos are safe."
There were 40 Filipino troops in the encampment that came under attack, and 35 in the second, according to the Philippine military.
The Syrian rebels seized 44 Fijian peacekeepers on Thursday. The rebels then demanded that the 75 Filipinos manning two separate UN encampments 4 kilometers (2.5 miles) apart surrender their weapons, but they refused.
The situation of the peacekeepers, whose mission monitors a 1974 disengagement accord between Syria and Israel, remains "very, very fluid," the UN secretary-general's spokesman, Stephane Dujarric, told reporters Friday at the U.N. headquarters in New York.
EU leaders are meeting in Brussels on Saturday (30 August) to clinch a deal on two top posts and to discuss further sanctions on Russia over its military intervention in Ukraine.
The summit will start at 5pm local time after leaders earlier in the afternoon will gather in their respective political families.
Brussels-based diplomats on Friday were indicating that a deal is emerging for Polish prime minister Donald Tusk to become the next EU Council chief once Herman Van Rompuy steps down in November and for Italian foreign minister Federica Mogherini to succeed Catherine Ashton as foreign affairs chief.
A spokeswoman for the Polish government on Friday broke the silence Tusk had kept so far about the EU post.
"European leaders are increasingly strongly persuading Donald Tusk to assume the post of president of the European Council," Polish government spokeswoman Malgorzata Kidawa-Blonska told Reuters.
Once the top jobs decision is taken, EU leaders will hear from Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko about the latest developments after this week's Russian military incursion into Ukrainian territory.
Leaders will then discuss what kind of further sanctions would be appropriate, with several countries - notably France, Hungary, and Slovakia - already indicating little appetite for more economic measures.
The likely outcome is for the council to task the EU diplomatic service and the EU commission with drafting new proposals. But diplomats expect this round of sanctions to take longer than the ones adopted in the aftermath of the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, which killed 298 people, mostly EU citizens.
Also on the summit agenda are the developments in Syria and Iraq where the Islamic State (IS) is gaining ground and a high number of EU citizens have joined the radical militias who kill anyone who does not convert to Islam.
Welcome to the Britain that David Cameron and Theresa May have done so very much to create: “UK Raises Terror Threat Level To ‘Severe,’” by Brett LoGiurato, Business Insider, August 29, 2014 (thanks to all who sent this in):
Britain’s government has raised the country’s terror threat level to “severe,” Home Secretary Theresa May said Friday.
It’s the fourth-highest of five potential threat levels. According to the U.K. government, it means an attack is “highly likely.” But there is no intelligence to suggest an attack is imminent.
May said the threat level was raised because of the risk from the deterorating situation in Iraq and Syria, where extremist militants from the group calling itself the Islamic State (also ISIS or ISIL). May said, however, that there was no specific threat to Britain that caused the raise in the terror level. This is the first time Britain’s terror threat level has been at “severe” since 2011.
“The increase in the threat level is related to developments in Syria and Iraq where terrorist groups are planning attacks against the West. Some of these plots are likely to involve foreign fighters who have traveled there from the UK and Europe to take part in those conflicts,” May said in a statement.
“The first and most important duty of government is the protection of the British people. We have already taken steps to amend our powers and increase our capabilities for dealing with the developing terrorist threats we face. That process will continue and the British public should be in no doubt that we will take the strongest possible action to protect our national security.”
In a statement delivered from Downing Street in London Friday afternoon, U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron said Britain was facing a “greater and deeper threat to our security than we have known before.” He said confronting ISIS was part of a generational struggle that he thought could last “decades.”
“Poisonous ideology of Islamist extremism is the root cause of the terror threat,” Cameron said. “We will always act with urgency when needed.”
The West — particularly the U.S. and U.K. — have increased their warnings about ISIS in the wake of the group’s brutal murder of American journalist James Foley last week. A 23-year-old former British rapper is considered a prime suspect in Foley’s beheading. Cameron said Friday that it “increasingly seems to be a British terrorist recorded on that video” of Foley’s murder.
At least 500 people from Britain have traveled to Middle Eastern regions to join ISIS, Cameron said. Western officials have warned about the possibility of ISIS fighters holding Western countries’ passports traveling back to those countries to plan and possibly launch attacks.
Cameron said there was “no doubt” in his mind that ISIS is “targeting all of us in Western Europe.” He did not commit to joining the U.S. and possibly other allies in taking military action against the group, saying it was just “one element of what we can do.”
“We must use aid, diplomacy, and our military,” he said.
Vladimir Putin has criticized Washington’s unilateral actions on the international arena, saying that whatever it touches seems to be turning into Libya or Iraq. Below are the top 10 quotes from the Russian President’s speech at the Seliger youth forum.
Unilateral decisions made outside the United Nations are usually doomed to failure, Putin said Friday, while speaking at the “Seliger-2014” annual youth forum.
“Do you remember the joke: ‘Whatever Russians make, they always end up with a Kalashnikov?’ I get an impression that whatever Americans touch they always end up with Libya or Iraq,” Putin told the participants of the 10th forum held on Lake Seliger in Tver region, some 370 km north of Moscow.
“When decisions are made unilaterally, they always turn out to be short lived. And the other way round: it’s difficult to reach consensus at the UN because often opposite opinions and positions collide. But that is the only way to achieve long-term decisions,” he said.
When a decision is balanced and supported by key members of the international community, Putin said, everyone starts working in order fulfill it perfectly.
'UN won’t be needed if it serves only US and its allies'
Putin totally disagreed that the UN is inefficient. But the organization needs to be reformed and its instruments should be used efficiently.
The reform should become a result of a consensus reached by the overwhelming majority of the members of the organization, he said.
It is also necessary to preserve the fundamental grounds of the UN’s efficiency. In particular, only the Security Council should have the power to make decision on sanctions and the use of military force, Putin said. And these decisions must be obligatory for everyone. Such mechanisms should not be eroded. “Otherwise the UN will turn into the League of Nations,” the Russian President said.
The organization will lose its purpose if it is only an “instrument to serve foreign policy interests of only one country – in this case the US and its allies,” Putin. “Then it is not needed.”
Putin compared the shelling of east Ukrainian towns and cities by Kiev army to actions by the Nazi forces during the World War Two.
“Sad as it might seem, this reminds me of the events of World War II, when the German Nazi troops surrounded our cities, like Leningrad, and directly shelled those cities and their residents,” Putin said.
“Why they (Kiev) call this a military-humanitarian operation?” he said, adding that the conflicting sides should get to a negotiating table.
Ukrainians who did not support the coup mounted by “our western partners” with the backing of radical nationalists, are being suppressed by the military force, Putin said speaking about the situation in the neighboring state.
“We’re no fools. We saw symbolic cookies handed out on [by Victoria Nuland] Maidan, information support, political support. What that means? A full involvement of the US and European nations into the process of the power change: a violent unconstitutional power change.”
“And the part of the country that disagreed with that is being suppressed with the use of jets, artillery, multiple launch systems and tanks,” Putin said. “If these are today’s European values – I’m gravely disappointed.”
Putin said that Russia did not “annex” Crimea, as the peninsula’s reunion with Russia is often described by foreign media and politicians.
“We didn’t not annex it, we didn’t take it away. We gave people an opportunity to have their say and make a decision, which we took with respect. We protected them, I believe.”
“We had to protect our compatriots, who live there (in Crimea). When we look at events in Donbass, Lugansk, Odessa, it becomes clear to us what would have happened to Crimea if we had not taken measures to provide free expression of will to people.”
'Russia to beef up nuclear deterrence potential'
Russia is going to boost its military forces and nuclear deterrence potential, Putin told the youth forum.
“Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear states. It’s not words, it is the reality,” he said. “We are strengthening our nuclear deterrence forces, we are strengthening our armed forces…We are beefing up our potential and will continue doing so.”
This is being done “not to threaten anyone, “but to feel secure,” he added.
'Crimea recognition will be long and tedious'
It will take a long while for Crimea to be internationally recognizes as part of Russia, Putin believes.
He said he finds it “strange” and referred to an example with the recognition of Kosovo independence where a political will and desire were enough to make such a decision “easily.”
He also recalled that in case with Kosovo, no referendum was held: the decision on independence was made by the parliament of the Serbian breakaway republic. In the situation with Crimea, there was both a decision by the parliament and a referendum. In Putin’s view, the latter was a more democratic way for a nation’s self-determination.
Is There A Microchip Implant In Your Future?
You can inject one under your skin and no one will ever notice. Using short-range radio frequency identification (RFID) signals, it can transmit your identity as you pass through a security checkpoint or walk into a football stadium. It can help you buy groceries at Wal-Mart. In a worst-case scenario – if you are kidnapped in a foreign country, for example – it could save your life.
Microchip implants like the ones pet owners use to track their dogs and cats could become commonplace in humans in the next decade. Experts are divided on whether they’re appropriate for people, but the implants could offer several advantages. For soldiers and journalists in war zones, an implant could be the difference between life and death. A tracker could also help law enforcement quickly locate a kidnapped child.
“In the long run, chip implants could make it less intrusive than some emerging ID systems which rely on physical biometrics (like your fingerprints or unique eye pattern),” says Alex Soojung-Kim Pang, author of the book “Distraction Addiction” and visiting scholar at Stanford's University’s Peace Innovation...
They could be used to track the activities of felons who have been released from prison.
Chips are being used today to manage farm animals. Farmers can track sheep, pigs and horses as they move through a gate, weigh them instantly and make sure they are eating properly.
“Those same chips have found their way into RFID devices to activate the gas pump from a key ring and for anti-theft devices in cars,” said Stu Lipoff, an electrical engineer and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers spokesman.
“There have been people who volunteered to use them for opening the door of an apartment as a personalized ID using your arm. It could be used to track criminals targeted for patrol who might wander into a restricted area.”
Implants are normally useful only at short ranges – as you walk through a portal or close to a transponder. So using chip implants to track people would require an infrastructure of transponders scattered around a city that read their identity in public buildings and street corners, Lipoff said.
But consider the possibilities: People could unlock their homes or cars, gain access to a building, pass through an airport and even unlock their laptops without using a phone or watch. A pin code could be used to activate the chip – or to deactivate it to maintain privacy.
They are easy to install and remove, and, because they are implanted under the skin, they are unobtrusive. The chips, which could be the size of a thumbnail, could be injected into an arm or a hand.
If children were chipped, teachers could take attendance in the classroom. Lipoff said that GPS would not work because skin would block the signal, although new Near Field Communication chips like those in current smartphones could work because of their low-power requirement. However, no-one has yet tried to implant NFC chips.
Police could track cars and read data without needing to scan license plates. At a hospital, administrators could locate a doctor without having to rely on a pager. And if you walked into a donut shop, the owner could read your taste preferences (glazed or not glazed) without needing a loyalty card.
And beyond the obvious privacy issues, there’s something strange about injecting a chip in your body, Lipoff says. Yet pacemakers and other embedded devices are commonly used today. “People might find it a bit unsavory, but if it is not used to track you, and apart from the privacy issues, there are many interesting applications,” he says.
At least it’s better than having a barcode stitched onto our foreheads.
