Landmarks in NATO have changed completely. The final documents of NATO sessions are now beginning with short references to September 11, but not to the ruin of the USSR and the Eastern Bloc, as before. The new reference point dictates very much. Terrorism has by now had no international legal definition. In fact, terrorism is those states and organizations the US is battling. The complete list is drawn by John R. Bolton, U.S. Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, the central American press has informed the other day.
American newspapers write that Bolton's choice is sometimes dubious. As any person, he has his preferences and ambitions. NATO is currently opposing the sort of terrorism as outlined by Bolton. But as he his is an employee of the administration of the superpower dominating in the bloc, every NATO member, as well as candidates and sympathizers, including Russia, are obliged to make contributions to the common cause.
This was the keynote of the decisions of the NATO session in Reykjavik, as well as the agendas of the subsequent series of international meetings which have actually been shaped. The package of issues considered in Reykjavik can quite distinctly be divided into two: what Europe in the person of the European Union must contribute to the global security and what Russia must. During the meeting, NATO Secretary General George Robertson repeated stated his demand to the permanent members, novices, and partners: "Dues, dues, dues!" meanwhile, the U.S. representatives appealed that the EU finally create serious forces of rapid response, not to divert the NATO resources and combative power.
The US has grave claim to EU states. Despite the line to spend no less than 2% of GDP on military issues, Europeans are lagging behind this figure increasingly further. The main infringer is Germany that has reduced this share twice since 1990: from 2.8% to 1.4%. The communique for the meeting between EU and NATO ministers in Reykjavik says that Europeans will have to "undertake more responsibility" for the situation in the Balkans and in general do everything possible "to institutionalize the EU-NATO relationship".
The same 2% is presently the main obstacle for newcomers striving for NATO.
Along the way, the meeting in Reykjavik decided how exactly the new bureaucracy would function - the "Council of Twenty" with the participation of Russia. Moscow let them understand through the politically correct language that it had expected more in relation to the influence on making the most important decisions. Since Russia's share in the arising of Pax Americana is also great, though hard to measure in real money: granting flyover rights acros its airspace, not opposing the American expansion in Central Asia, and distancing itself from its former allies in the "multipolar world", for instance Iran.
Apart from that, leading expert in foreign policy issues and longstanding adviser of the German chancellor Michael Stuermer noted that Russia might also be useful to NATO as a source of intelligence. Meanwhile, its oil supplies to the international market could quite compete with those of the Middle East suppliers, depriving them of the opportunity to dictate their terms to the West engaged in the battle against the world evil.
Newcomer candidates are contributing to the NATO security moneybox what they can. Thus, Romania offered itself as the base for a military transit to Georgia, both by sea and by air. Bulgaria's share is passing on into the channel of enmity towards Russia. Although this does not quite meet the new line in the issue of friends and enemies, it was apparently considered that this approach would stimulate Bulgaria to part with its past as soon as possible, as it is incompatible with the NATO standards.
Thus, the forum made another step in solving the main problem - how to mobilize the European resource to support the new NATO plans. Along the way, it turned out that the US might have much less trouble with Russia in the settlement of this task than with Europeans.