At commemoration of Dayton Peace Accords, NATO leader urges military spending to counter Russia
DAYTON, Ohio (AP) — Representatives from NATO-aligned nations concluded a gathering in Dayton, Ohio, Monday to mark the 30th anniversary of the Dayton Peace Accords, the agreement that ended the Bosnian war, amid Russia's unprecedented drone offensive in Ukraine.
NATO formed in 1949 to provide collective security against the Soviet Union. It now includes 32 countries. Ukraine is not a member, but participants in NATO gatherings over the past week have said a victory against Russia in the 3-year-old war is crucial to European and global stability.
The anniversary was framed as a celebration of diplomacy and peace. The original accords were negotiated at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, in Ohio, and signed in Paris later that year.
'The Western Balkans has shown that peace is possible. But today Europe is not at peace. Russia has brought war back to Europe,' said NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte at Monday's meeting of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, the culmination of the five-day gathering.
Rutte called on NATO member leaders to make the case at home for increasing military spending, suggesting that an increase to 5% of gross domestic product over the next few years could be reached in an agreement next month, in line with demands from the NATO member U.S.
Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Italy, Luxembourg, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain do not currently spend at least 2% of GDP on national defense budgets, a goal agreed to in 2023 as Russia's war on Ukraine entered its second year. So far, 22 of the 32 member countries have done so.
Next month, the members will debate increasing that percentage to 3.5%, plus another 1.5% in spending on defense-related projects like roads and cybersecurity infrastructure.
Cultural events accompanied the official meetings in Ohio, including art and history exhibits, public lectures, and a Concert for Peace featuring musicians from Dayton and Bosnia's capital of Sarajevo. A downtown 'NATO Village' displayed flags from member nations, and additional exhibits highlighted the city's international ties.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
2 hours ago
Wagner Group leaving Mali after heavy losses but Russia's Africa Corps to remain
DAKAR, Senegal -- The Russia-backed Wagner Group said Friday it is leaving Mali after more than three and a half years of fighting Islamic extremists and insurgents in the country. Despite Wagner's announcement, Russia will continue to have a mercenary presence in the West African country. The Africa Corps, Russia's state-controlled paramilitary force, said on its Telegram channel Friday that Wagner's departure would not introduce any changes and the Russian contingent will remain in Mali. "Mission accomplished. Private Military Company Wagner returns home,' the group announced via its channel on the messaging app Telegram. It said it had brought all regional capitals under control of the Malian army, pushed out armed militants and killed their commanders. Mali, along with neighbors Burkina Faso and Niger, has for more than a decade battled an insurgency fought by armed groups, including some allied with al-Qaida and the Islamic State group. As Western influence in the region has waned, Russia has sought to step into the vacuum, sweeping in with offers of assistance. Moscow initially expanded its military cooperation with African nations by using the Wagner Group of mercenaries. But since the group's leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin, was killed in a plane crash in 2023, after mounting a brief armed rebellion in Russia that challenged the rule of President Vladimir Putin, Moscow has been developing the Africa Corps as a rival force to Wagner. Africa Corps is under direct command of the Russian defense ministry. According to U.S. officials, there are around 2,000 mercenaries in Mali. It is unclear how many are with Wagner and how many are part of the Africa Corps. Beverly Ochieng, a security analyst specializing in the Sahel for Control Risks consultancy, said the Russian defense ministry had been negotiating with Mali to take on more Africa Corps fighters and for Wagner mercenaries to join Russia's state-controlled paramilitary force. 'Since the death of Prigozhin, Russia has had this whole plan to then make the Wagner Group fall under the command of the Ministry of Defense. One of the steps they made was to revamp or introduce the Africa Corps, which is the way in which the Russian paramilitaries would retain a presence in areas where the Wagner group has been operating,' Ochieng said. Wagner has been present in Mali since late 2021 following a military coup, replacing French troops and international peacekeepers to help fight the militants. But the Malian army and Russian mercenaries struggled to curb violence in the country and have both been accused of targeting civilians. Last month, United Nations experts urged Malian authorities to investigate reports of alleged summary executions and forced disappearances by Wagner mercenaries and the army. In December, Human Rights Watch accused Malian armed forces and the Wagner Group of deliberately killing at least 32 civilians over an 8-month span. The announcement of Wagner's withdrawal comes as the Malian army and the Russian mercenaries suffered heavy losses during attacks by the al-Qaida linked group JNIM in recent weeks. Last week, JNIM fighters killed dozens of soldiers in an attack on a military base in central Mali. Rida Lyammouri, a Sahel expert at the Morocco-based Policy Center for the New South, said the major losses might have caused the possible end of Wagner's mission. 'The lack of an official and mutual announcement from both the Malian authorities and Wagner indicate possible internal dispute which led to this sudden decision. Simultaneously, this could point to a new framework for Russian presence in the country," he said. Replacing Wagner with Africa Corps troops would likely shift Russia's focus in Mali from fighting alongside the Malian army to training, said Ulf Laessing, head of the Sahel program at the Konrad Adenauer Foundation. 'Africa Corps has a lighter footprint and focuses more on training, providing equipment and doing protection services. They fight less than the 'Rambo-type' Wagner mercenaries,' Laessing said.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hegseth says Nato allies ‘very close' to raising defence spending target to 5%
The US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, said Nato allies were 'very close, almost near consensus' to an agreement to significantly raise targets for defence spending to 5% of GDP in the next decade. The Trump administration official indicated he expected the increased target to be agreed at a summit in The Hague later this month – and confirmed that the headline figure was to be split into two parts. 'This alliance, in a matter of weeks, will be committing to 5%: 3.5% in hard military and 1.5% in infrastructure and defence-related activities. That combination constitutes a real commitment,' he said. Hegseth was speaking at a press conference at Nato headquarters in Brussels after the morning session of an all-day meeting of defence ministers from the 32-country transatlantic military alliance. 'I'm very encouraged by what we heard in there,' Hegseth told reporters. 'Countries in there are well exceeding 2% and we think very close, almost near consensus, on a 5% commitment to Nato.' Nato's current target level for military spending, agreed at a summit in Cardiff in 2014, is 2% of GDP, but Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that European allies and Canada do not spend enough compared with the US. In an attempt to avoid Trump wrecking the first Nato summit of his second term, the alliance's new secretary general, Mark Rutte, proposed a 3.5% plus 1.5% target, though there is some ambiguity about the target date. Initial reports suggested that Rutte wanted allies to hit the target from 2032, though earlier this week British sources suggested the date could be 2035. Sweden's defence minister said he would like to see the target hit by 2030. Only Poland currently exceeds the 3.5% target for hard military spending at 4.32%, according to Nato figures, while the US defence budget, the largest in the alliance, amounts to 3.4% of GDP, at $967bn (£711bn). The UK spends 2.33% of GDP on its military, but has pledged to increase that to 2.5% by 2027 and to 3% some time in the next parliament. Earlier this week the prime minister, Keir Starmer, declined to set a firm date for the UK achieving 3% as he unveiled a strategic defence review. Related: Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls | Martin Kettle Rutte will visit London on Monday to meet Starmer before the summit. Downing Street said the prime minister and the secretary general would 'talk about how we ensure all allies step up their defence spending now in order to respond to the threats that we face now'. Germany's defence minister, Boris Pistorius, said Berlin would need up to 60,000 additional troops to meet new Nato targets for weapons and personnel. 'We are stepping up to our responsibility as Europe's largest economy,' the minister said on Thursday. Germany, which currently spends 2.12% of GDP on defence, had been singled out by Trump as a laggard in spending, though until Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Berlin had been reluctant to be a leader in European military spending, partly due to the memories of the militarism of the second world war.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Russia is at war with Britain and US is no longer a reliable ally, UK adviser says
Russia is at war with Britain, the US is no longer a reliable ally and the UK has to respond by becoming more cohesive and more resilient, according to one of the three authors of the strategic defence review. Fiona Hill, from County Durham, became the White House's chief Russia adviser during Donald Trump's first term and contributed to the British government's strategy. She made the remarks in an interview with the Guardian. 'We're in pretty big trouble,' Hill said, describing the UK's geopolitical situation as caught between 'the rock' of Vladimir Putin's Russia and 'the hard place' of Donald Trump's increasingly unpredictable US. Hill, 59, is perhaps the best known of the reviewers appointed by Labour, alongside Lord Robertson, a former Nato secretary general, and the retired general Sir Richard Barrons. She said she was happy to take on the role because it was 'such a major pivot point in global affairs'. She remains a dual national after living in the US for more than 30 years. 'Russia has hardened as an adversary in ways that we probably hadn't fully anticipated,' Hill said, arguing that Putin saw the Ukraine war as a starting point to Moscow becoming 'a dominant military power in all of Europe'. As part of that long-term effort, Russia was already 'menacing the UK in various different ways,' she said, citing 'the poisonings, assassinations, sabotage operations, all kinds of cyber-attacks and influence operations. The sensors that we see that they're putting down around critical pipelines, efforts to butcher undersea cables.' The conclusion, Hill said, was that 'Russia is at war with us'. The foreign policy expert, a longtime Russia watcher, said she had first made a similar warning in 2015, in a revised version of a book she wrote about the Russian president with Clifford Gaddy, reflecting on the invasion and annexation of Crimea. 'We said Putin had declared war on the west,' she said. At the time, other experts disagreed, but Hill said events since had demonstrated 'he obviously had, and we haven't been paying attention to it'. The Russian leader, she argues, sees the fight in Ukraine as 'part of a proxy war with the United States; that's how he has persuaded China, North Korea and Iran to join in'. Putin believed that Ukraine had already been decoupled from the US relationship, Hill said, because 'Trump really wants to have a separate relationship with Putin to do arms control agreements and also business that will probably enrich their entourages further, though Putin doesn't need any more enrichment'. When it came to defence, however, she said the UK could not rely on the military umbrella of the US as during the cold war and in the generation that followed, at least 'not in the way that we did before'. In her description, the UK 'is having to manage its number one ally', though the challenge is not to overreact because 'you don't want to have a rupture'. This way of thinking appears in the defence review published earlier this week, which says 'the UK's longstanding assumptions about global power balances and structures are no longer certain' – a rare acknowledgment in a British government document of how far and how fast Trumpism is affecting foreign policy certainties. The review team reported to Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, and the defence secretary, John Healey. Most of Hill's interaction were with Healey, however, and she said she had met the prime minister only once – describing him as 'pretty charming … in a proper and correct way' and as 'having read all the papers'. Hill was not drawn on whether she had advised Starmer or Healey on how to deal with Donald Trump, saying instead: 'The advice I would give is the same I would give in a public setting.' She said simply that the Trump White House 'is not an administration, it is a court' in which a transactional president is driven by his 'own desires and interests, and who listens often to the last person he talks to'. She added that unlike his close circle, Trump had 'a special affinity for the UK' based partly on his own family ties (his mother came from the Hebridean island of Lewis, emigrating to New York aged 18) and an admiration for the royal family, particularly the late queen. 'He talked endlessly about that,' she said. On the other hand, Hill is no fan of the populist right administration in the White House and worries it could come to Britain if 'the same culture wars' are allowed to develop with the encouragement of Republicans from the US. She noted that Reform UK had won a string of council elections last month, including in her native Durham, and that the party's leader, Nigel Farage, wanted to emulate some of the aggressive efforts to restructure government led by Elon Musk's 'department of government efficiency' (Doge) before his falling-out with Trump. 'When Nigel Farage says he wants to do a Doge against the local county council, he should come over here [to the US] and see what kind of impact that has,' she said. 'This is going to be the largest layoffs in US history happening all at once, much bigger than hits to steelworks and coalmines.' Hill's argument is that in a time of profound uncertainty, Britain needs greater internal cohesion if it is to protect itself. 'We can't rely exclusively on anyone any more,' she said, arguing that Britain needed to have 'a different mindset' based as much on traditional defence as on social resilience. Some of that, Hill said, was about a greater recognition of the level of external threat and initiatives for greater integration, by teaching first aid in schools or encouraging more teenagers to join school cadet forces, a recommendation of the defence review. 'What you need to do is get people engaged in all kinds of different ways in support of their communities,' she said. Hill said she saw that deindustrialisation and a rise of inequality in Russia and the US had contributed to the rise in national populism in both countries. Politicians in Britain, or elsewhere, 'have to be much more creative and engage people where they are at' as part of a 'national effort', she said. If this seems far away from a conventional view of defence, that's because it is, though Hill also argues that traditional conceptions of war are changing as technology evolves and with it what makes a potent force. 'People keep saying the British army has the smallest number of troops since the Napoleonic era. Why is the Napoleonic era relevant? Or that we have fewer ships than the time of Charles II. The metrics are all off here,' she said. 'The Ukrainians are fighting with drones. Even though they have no navy, they sank a third of the Russian Black Sea fleet.' Her aim, therefore, is not just to be critical but to propose solutions. Hill recalled that a close family friend, on hearing that she had taken on the defence review, had told her: ''Don't tell us how shite we are, tell us what we can do, how we can fix things.' People understand that we have a problem and that the world has changed.'
