NATO coming to Dayton: 5 things to know about security, global stage
Mar. 3—Editor's note: Every Sunday Josh Sweigart, editor of investigations and solutions journalism, brings you the top stories from the Dayton Daily News and major stories over the past week you may have missed. Go here to sign up to receive the Weekly Update newsletter and our Morning Briefing delivered to your inbox every morning.
In May, the parliamentary assembly of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will hold its first meeting in the U.S. in 20 years in Dayton. The event will mark the 30th anniversary of the Dayton Peace Accords. The NATO Parliamentary Assembly is a big deal, and this event was years in the making. Today, we look at what this means for Dayton.
Here are five things to know from our reporting:
1. Security concerns: The last NATO Parliamentary Assembly in Montreal in November was marred by protesters crashing with police. It was a violent scene, with smashed storefront windows and cars set ablaze. In this story, reporter Cornelius Frolik looks at whether Dayton could see such chaos and what's being done to prepare.
2. NATO village: Partially in response to what happened in Montreal, event organizers are establishing a "NATO village" encompassing much of downtown Dayton where foreign delegates will meet. Access to this area will be restricted. Go here for a map of the secure area and what it means for downtown businesses.
3. World stage: The NATO Parliamentary Assembly is coming to Dayton as NATO itself faces an existential crisis over how to respond to the war in Ukraine. In this story, we look at how Dayton will be on the world stage during a historic time amid debate over how to end the bloodiest conflict in Europe since NATO was formed after World War II.
4. Local venues: CareSource properties and the Benjamin & Marian Schuster Performing Arts Center will host NATO events, with a possible closing celebration at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force. This story looks at what this means for those venues. They will also host cultural events such as a "Concert of Peace" featuring the Sarajevo Philharmonic Orchestra.
5. Price tag: U.S. Rep. Mike Turner, R-Dayton, was instrumental in bringing the NATO Parliamentary Assembly to Dayton (he wrote this recent column about NATO and Ukraine), and obtained $2 million in federal funds to help pay for it. The state of Ohio is spending another $5.3 million for security.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
2 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Canada Shakes Off the Rust on Defense
The politics of military spending is a funny thing. Canada's Liberal Party spent the past decade making promises it had no intention of keeping, and in July 2023 we called Canada's 1.38% of GDP contribution 'pathetic.' But suddenly a strong defense can play well at home as anti-American, even as it helps appease President Trump. Prime Minister Mark Carney announced $9 billion in new military spending this past week, enough to bring Canada in compliance with NATO's current 2% of GDP target by early next year. Justin Trudeau, Mr. Carney's predecessor, had pledged to meet the target by 2032, which might as well mean never.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
The UK should protect its allies in the Gulf and Middle East – but Israel isn't one of them
For Britain, Israel is mostly a strategic liability – but it's also a very close ally in stopping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. Now that Israel is locked in a war with Iran and Britain is rushing to send a handful of RAF jets to the region, that relationship needs careful management. The UK cannot afford to be seen as guilty by association in respect of Israel's campaign in Gaza, or to suffer reputational damage by offering Israel unnecessary help – there is plenty for the RAF to do aside from that. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has said that the aircraft may be used to defend the UK's allies – in other words, shoot down Iranian missiles heading towards Tel Aviv. Helping Israel to stop the erratic and malevolent Iranian regime from making an atomic bomb is smart. Being seen to do so, and protecting Israel against the consequences of its endeavours, is not. Iran has threatened to attack any US ally that defends Israel. The US has already helped to shoot down ballistic missiles fired by Tehran in retaliation for the ongoing, and widespread, Israeli attacks on Iran's air defences, missile systems, military leadership and nuclear programme. The US has a vast array of military assets very close to Iran, with air force and navy bases positioned across the Persian Gulf, in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman. These are all vulnerable to attack. Given the UK is a Nato member, joining in with the defence of these locations would be good politics, and could be considered part of its obligations to the alliance under the Article 5 mutual defence agreement. But Reeves was opaque about what the RAF's handful of aircraft, likely operating out of Akrotiri in Cyprus, would be doing. Asked whether the UK would come to Israel's aid if it were asked to, the chancellor told Sky News's Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips: 'We have, in the past, supported Israel when there have been missiles coming in. I'm not going to comment on what might happen in the future, but so far we haven't been involved, and we're sending in assets both to protect ourselves and also potentially to support our allies.' Let's be very clear. Israel is prosecuting a campaign against the population of Gaza with the intent, according to Israeli cabinet ministers, to empty the territory of 2.5 million people. It is simultaneously campaigning on the West Bank, illegally taking land from Palestinians there, setting up colonies, and imposing a system of grand apartheid on the non-Jewish population. The UK has attracted widespread criticism for its reluctant and tardy criticism of these operations, and continues to operate a spy plane over Gaza while supplying small amounts of military equipment to Israel. This is a very bad look – a moral failure that could lead to blowback in the form of violence against the UK. In April last year, former head of MI6 Sir Alex Younger told a Commons committee: 'You cannot pretend that the international environment, our foreign policy or the way in which the West is perceived are not significant drivers of all of this.' This is obvious. It should be obvious, too, to the British government that the very limited military capacity the UK has will make no difference at all to the defence of Israel. Israeli forces were able to fly 200 planes in their first attacks on Iran this week. There's no way the UK can get that many into the air under any circumstances. According to Military Balance 2025, a report published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Israel has 240 fighter-bombers. The UK has 113. Israel has more attack helicopters (Apaches mostly) – 38 vs 31 – and the RAF has only nine aerial tankers compared with Israel's 14. Israel also has the kind of air-defence capability that the UK could only dream of; this includes the Iron Dome system, so effective against Hamas attacks. It also has the David's Sling system, which has a range of about 185 miles and, like the Iron Dome, can take down short- and medium-range missiles by smashing into them mid-flight. Meanwhile, its Arrow 2 defence system can hit incoming missiles 30 miles away at very high altitude, while Arrow 3 has a range of 1,500 miles and can shoot down missiles in space. The UK and US do have a very important listening station in Akrotiri, which is also a busy airfield for planes flying over Gaza and the whole of the Middle East. It is within range of Iranian missiles and would need defending by the UK's extra jets and other assets. Iran is likely to try to strangle oil traffic through the Gulf. The UK used to help patrol the region, but the Royal Navy has been steadily reducing its presence there. Meanwhile, Britain runs the UK Maritime Trade Operations service, which advises shipping in the Gulf and Red Sea about security threats. It has stepped up its warnings to shipping in the Gulf and has reported the jamming of navigation systems and ramming attacks by small, unknown vessels before Israel's sorties against Tehran. These operations are clearly ongoing rehearsals and training being carried out by Iranian forces. So, there is plenty for Britain to do without risking the reputational damage that could occur as a result of helping Israel with military aid that it hardly needs right now. It's geopolitical dirty linen.
Politico
11 hours ago
- Politico
Trump wants to score trade deals in Canada. He's unlikely to get them.
President Donald Trump will arrive in the Canadian Rockies on Sunday for a meeting of the world's economic powerhouses facing a potentially calamitous tariff deadline and a burgeoning crisis in the Middle East. But he's unlikely to leave the three-day summit with a breakthrough on either front. Trump is eager to use the G7 meetings to show progress toward an array of trade deals with the U.S.'s most critical allies. The gathering also takes on heightened importance in the wake of an Israeli attack on Iran that sent oil prices skyrocketing and injected fresh uncertainty into the global economy. But Trump officials are struggling to lock down trade pacts that they predicted were imminent in the wake of a first deal with the U.K. nearly a month ago. Even early chatter of a deal with Japan by this week's conference appears unlikely, said two people close to the White House, granted anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. And now, with the U.S. occupied by turmoil in the Middle East, Trump aides and advisers are tempering expectations for what the G7 may ultimately produce. 'Everybody just wants to survive,' said Ivo Daalder, president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and a former U.S. ambassador to NATO. 'There's not a lot of interest in making deals.' In a call with reporters on Friday, a senior U.S. official granted anonymity to preview the summit offered little in the way of specific goals, saying only that Trump sought to 'make progress' in a range of areas including 'making America's trade relationships fair and reciprocal.' The lowered stakes reflect the plodding pace of negotiations with economic partners since April, when Trump blew up their trade ties in pursuit of new deals that he's insisted must be more favorable to the United States. Leaders across Europe are projecting resolve despite the prospect of punishing tariffs come early July. The reduced expectations also underscore how quickly Trump's return to office has fractured the close Western alliance that the U.S. long claimed to lead. Whereas the G7 once prided itself on speaking with one authoritative voice on critical economic and national security matters, most leaders are now just hoping to escape the summit site in Kananaskis, Alberta, without opening a new front in their fight with Trump, diplomatic experts and others involved in the summit preparations said. The G7 countries have already abandoned hopes of signing a traditional joint statement, upending decades of precedent over worries that Trump and his counterparts are too far apart on a number of key issues. The nations instead plan to issue a handful of 'leaders' statements' on more specific issues where all or most of them can reach agreement. The move averts the risk of a repeat of the last Canada-hosted summit, when Trump in 2018 abruptly rejected the statement via an incensed tweet from Air Force One. Back then, negotiators had spent hours haggling over a single word in a line related to trade amid Trump's vows to impose steeper tariffs on allies, said one of the people close to the White House. But shortly after reaching agreement, then-Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau criticized the U.S. tariffs, enraging Trump and prompting him to pull his support. New Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has sought to sidestep conflict with the rest of his agenda as well, with multilateral meetings on topics like energy security and drug trafficking aimed at emphasizing areas of common ground. As for the White House, it's shied away from making grand promises. A potential trade deal with Japan is unlikely to be finalized. And while officials cautioned that Trump could always broker a surprise agreement in meetings with other world leaders, there's little expectation that the summit will yield more than commitments to keep talking. 'Everyone's in really different spots in their trade relationships,' one of the people close to the White House said of the several parallel efforts to strike new trade agreements. 'I would be shocked if they came out with anything like the U.K.-U.S. framework in that environment.' Still, Trump and his aides view the G7 as a high-profile opportunity to reassert American primacy over even their closest allies, said advisers and others involved in the global preparations. Trump is likely to jump at any chance to demonstrate his administration's strength on the world stage, even if just rhetorically — forcing the rest of the group to decide when to go along and when to risk confrontation. 'A success on the U.S. side would be going to the summit and being seen as not being pushed around by other leaders,' said Caitlin Welsh, a former senior National Security Council official during Trump's first term. The president may get plenty of opportunities to cultivate that image. In addition to trade issues, Trump's response to Israel's attack on Iran will be closely watched for clues as to whether the U.S. will join the fray. Trump is also likely to face greater pressure to impose sanctions on Russia over its war in Ukraine — a step that he's publicly floated but remains reluctant to take. The president on Thursday said he was 'very disappointed in Russia' over its resistance to peace talks. But he quickly added that he was 'very disappointed in Ukraine also' in a sign of the wide gap between Trump's attitude toward the war and the rest of the G7's steadfast support for Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who was among those invited by Carney, has vowed to seek another sitdown with Trump at the summit. But even the prospect of a brief meeting has raised some concerns within the G7 over whether it's worth the risk that at any moment Trump and Zelenskyy's relationship could go sideways again — and sink U.S. support for Ukraine in the process. 'The value is only in maintaining the status quo,' Daalder said of discussions with Trump on the topic. But for Trump, the trade war that has consumed his first months in office is just as likely to dominate his three days in Canada. The president is expected to hold a series of bilateral meetings on the summit's sidelines, as the administration tries to push ahead trade deals in differing stages of negotiation. Trump has also tried to up the pressure on his G7 allies, vowing to greenlight a market-rattling return to steep tariffs on July 9 should they fail to clinch agreements in the coming weeks. The push still isn't expected to generate any quick victories in an area where negotiations are often measured in years rather than weeks. Yet allies in the U.S. and abroad are hoping that simply being back at the center of it all, surrounded by world leaders eager for a bit of his time, will prove enough progress for Trump to call off an even more severe trade war. 'He's completely comfortable with an outcome that ends in tariffs,' one of the people close to the White House said. 'But a lot of it depends on whether there's progress being made, and if he feels the countries are serious.' Amy Mackinnon contributed to this report.
