Komentáře k příspěvku: NATO Response Forces – good idea, bad shape

Od: Tomáš Karásek

Tomáš Karásek — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:37:23 +0000

It’s funny (or sad, depending on one’s perspective and mood) watching the EU and NATO going the same direction: downsizing. The EU managed to „develop“ the ESDP from corps-size RRF to battalion-size battlegroups, NATO’s „spearhead“ NRF is, as the article indicates, soon to be limited to not much more than yet another HQ. And of course this will be sold to the public as a great success which will be most welcome by the electorate, since it means we won’t be forced to spend more on the dreaded defence. From this point of view, I think it is justified to ask if the whole debate on the new NATO Strategic Concept is not a completely futile exercise.

Od: Petr Z.

Petr Z. — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 18:41:44 +0000

questionable survivability and effectivness, not all conflicts would be ended by the sheer fact of a NATO intervention…

Od: Petr Z.

Petr Z. — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 18:40:31 +0000

just three remarks, in my opinion the most salient problems regarding NRF are
- it is not clear under which condition should this force be used; what is their relation towards iregular warfare, as they are conceived as a spearhead contingent, soon to be followed by a more conventional force; (partially captured by the first point)
- there is no consensus concerning their use, and as the decision making is consensus driven, it is quite probable that NRF will never be used, except some humanitarian (read non-risk) operations; e.g. previously mentioned German veto for their deployment in Afghanistan.
-