“An attack on one is an attack on all,” NATO

[Yard Ape]

NATO invokes Article 5

POSTED AT 5:49 AM EDT Thursday, September 13
Associated Press


Brussles, Belgium — In a strong show of support, Washington‘s NATO allies declared Wednesday that the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington can be considered an attack on the whole alliance if they were directed from abroad.

“An attack on one is an attack on all,” NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson said after the alliance‘s 19 ambassadors decided to invoke Article 5 of the NATO charter for the first time in the alliance‘s history.

The decision obliges America‘s allies to provide support for any military operation against those responsible if Tuesday‘s attacks were committed by foreigners, he said.

“The country that is attacked has got to make the decision and has got to be the one that asks for help,” Mr. Robertson said. “They have not reached that judgment as to who did it and why they did it.”

On Thursday, Australia said in might implement part of a military treaty with the United States that would define Tuesday‘s terrorist attack as an attack on Australia. Prime Minister John Howard said that would allow the country would support and, if necessary, participate in any U.S. retaliatory strike against those found to be responsible. A decision was expected later Thursday.

Shortly before the NATO announcement, Secretary of State Colin Powell said invoking the principle would not necessarily mean using NATO force against terrorists and their protectors. It could include anything from opening up air space and providing intelligence to contributing troops and equipment.

Mr. Powell telephoned the leaders of the United Nations, NATO and the European Union on Wednesday in search of support for a coordinated response to the attacks on the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon.

He made two calls to Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and also spoke with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and top officials from Germany, Canada and Italy, among other countries.

In a separate show of allied solidarity, the European Union pledged Wednesday to help U.S. authorities track down and “punish those responsible” for Tuesday‘s attacks.

At a special meeting, EU foreign ministers meeting asked “all Europeans to observe three minutes of silence” on Friday at 6 a.m. EDT.

They declared Friday a “day of mourning” in all 15 EU nations because the attacks were “not only on the United States, but against humanity itself and the values of freedom we all share.”

“There will be no safe haven for terrorists and their sponsors,” the EU ministers said in a statement. “The Union will work closely with the United States and all partners to combat international terrorism.”

NATO officials stressed there was no discussion of military intervention at this point.

“At the moment this is an act of solidarity,” Mr. Robertson said, adding that the declaration “in no way” binds the United States ``against taking action on its own.”

After receiving assurances from President George W. Bush Wednesday that NATO members would be consulted very closely, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder offered his “full solidarity” with the U.S. for a possible response.

“They were not only attacks on the people in the United States, our friends in America, but also against the entire civilized world, against our own freedom, against our own values, values which we share with the American people,” he said.

Calling Tuesday‘s attacks a threat to peace and freedom everywhere, he said, “We will not let these values be destroyed - in Europe, America or anywhere in the world.”

Mr. Schroeder‘s chief of staff , meanwhile, said German, French, British and Israeli secret services consider Saudi exile Osama bin Laden as the prime suspect behind the attacks.

“The way it was carried out, the choice of targets, the military approach, the highly professional preparation and the presumably large financial resources ... (all) mean there are many points that indicate we should look for the perpetrators among those around Osama bin Laden,” Frank-Walter Steinmeier said.

He added that Germany expected the U.S. to launch strikes against whomever it determines carried out the attacks.

The notion of an attack against one ally being considered an attack against all dates back to the alliance‘s founding in 1949. Originally intended to be applied in case of a Cold War attack, Robertson said the principle “is no less valid” today.

In a statement, the NATO allies said “in the event of attacks ... each ally will assist (the U.S.) by taking such action as it deems necessary.

Accordingly, the United States‘ NATO allies stand ready to provide the assistance that may be required as a consequence of these acts of barbarism.”

Full text of NATO the official declaration issued by NATO‘s North Atlantic Council on Wednesday:

"On September 12th, the North Atlantic Council met again in response to the appalling attacks perpetrated yesterday against the United States.

"The Council agreed that if it is determined that this attack was directed from abroad against the United States, it shall be regarded as an action covered by Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, which states that an armed attack against one or more of the Allies in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.

"The commitment to collective self-defense embodied in the Washington Treaty was first entered into in circumstances very different from those that exist now, but it remains no less valid and no less essential today, in a world subject to the scourge of international terrorism.

"When the Heads of State and Government of NATO met in Washington in 1999, they paid tribute to the success of the Alliance in ensuring the freedom of its members during the Cold War and in making possible a Europe that was whole and free.

"But they also recognized the existence of a wide variety of risks to security, some of them quite unlike those that had called NATO into existence. More specifically, they condemned terrorism as a serious threat to peace and stability and reaffirmed their determination to combat it in accordance with their commitments to one another, their international commitments and national legislation.

"Article 5 of the Washington Treaty stipulates that in the event of attacks falling within its purview, each Ally will assist the Party that has been attacked by taking such action as it deems necessary. Accordingly, the United States NATO Allies stand ready to provide the assistance that may be required as a consequence of these acts of barbarism."

 

[McG]

On the cover of Today‘s Globe and Mail:
[qb] Secretary of State Colin Powell said the United States would respond "if it is a war . . . . It‘s going to be a long-term conflict."

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien threw his support behind the idea of a U.S.-led coalition, and suggested it include Japan and Russia, the two Group of Eight members that are not members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.[/qb]

 

[Art Johnson]

CANADA SUPPORTS TERORISM?

Senator Jerry Grafstein in an interview this morning stated that there are groups in
Canada with connections to terrorist who have been given charitable organization status
and are allowed to issue income tax receipts for donations to their organization. There is
a proposal before Parliament at this time to remove this status from these questionable
organizations but it is being stalled by the government acording to him.

 

[RCA]

Although I know that I am going out in left field here, let nobody forget that a quite a few Americans have given at least finacial support to the IRA in the past.

 

[Recce41]

RCA your right. In Boston there is a group called something like St pattys ORG. It supports the IRA.
They send Millions to a country they may have never been to. Look at the Tom Clansey book about such a ORG in Boston. But its run but the Americans so its ok I guess. I have family in Britian and Ireland. And they neverknow when they might get it there.
So let get a grip If terrisom is out lawed that means all. Would the Americans shot their own?
Sgt J CD, CDS com

 

[Yard Ape]

‘Canada at war‘: Manley

By Robert Fife, Ottawa Bureau Chief
National Post, with files from Jane Taber and Global News
17 Sept 01

OTTAWA - Canada will "unambiguously" join U.S. military action in striking back at terrorism, even if Canadian lives are lost, John Manley, Minister of Foreign Affairs, said yesterday.

"Canada is at war against terrorism," he said in an interview concerning the government‘s response to Tuesday‘s attacks. "The world changed in some very real ways as a result of those events and that is going to force us to look at all aspects of what we do."

Mr. Manley pledged Canada will "stand shoulder to shoulder" with the United States when it goes into battle against the perpetrators -- even if Canadian military personnel are put at risk.

"If they have things that they require [from the military], they should simply let us know," Mr. Manley said. "Let‘s remember we have already lost Canadian lives so I don‘t think anyone hesitates in saying our response is not just in support of the United States, but we have Canadians victims of this attack."

Asked if Canada is prepared to lose lives, Mr. Manley said: "We are victims of the attack. We are part of it so that is the end of that discussion."

He said Canada will also undertake a major review of its immigration and security policies to avoid a U.S. clampdown at the border. Washington has long criticized Canada as a haven for international terrorists, citing lax immigration and refugee policies and inadequate security laws. The United States and NATO have also chided Canada for inadequate military spending.

In a separate interview with television‘s Global Sunday, Mr. Manley emphasized again that this country‘s immigration and security laws will be re-examined in light of U.S. concerns about the ease with which international terrorists have entered Canada to raise money and mount attacks against the United States and other nations.

The U.S. Congress and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service have warned that virtually every known terrorist organization in the world is exploiting Canada‘s ethnic communities, posing a serious security threat.

Failure to take concrete action to reassess Canadian policies could cause irreparable harm to the economy and the free flow of commerce across the border, Mr. Manley acknowledged.

"We will have to make every effort to satisfy the United States as to the level of our border security. We have simply too much at stake economically in our ability to access the United States market -- over $1.3-billion U.S. dollars per day in trade -- we can‘t have them build a wall around the United States and us be on the outside of it. I think that is very clear so I think we need to satisfy them."

Mr. Manley also indicated Ottawa is prepared to heed concerns by the United States and NATO allies over Canada‘s defence spending, which is about 1.15 % of gross domestic product, half the NATO alliance average of 2.13 %.

"As we assess the world that we live in, we may well find that we‘re going to have to increase the amounts that we allocate to national defence as well as to our security force, as well as the RCMP and CSIS," Mr. Manley said.

Mr. Manley said Canadians will have to accept some limits to their freedoms as Canada and its allies put in place new measures to combat terrorism.

"Undoubtedly I think there is going to be a shift in that balance to some degree in favour of the duty to protect and away from individual liberty," he said. "It must never go too far or we take away the very essence of a free and democratic society but clearly we are going to have to look at every aspect of our security environment to see what adjustments need to be made in light of last Tuesday to assure Canadians that they live in a safe place."

Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister, is expected to elaborate on Canada‘s response to terrorist attacks in New York and Washington in a special parliamentary debate today.

The debate will be the first order of business when the House of Commons returns from its summer recess.

In his speech today, Mr. Chrétien will call "us back to our Canadian values," say insiders. He will ask Canadians not to lash out against ethnic communities. "It is not who we are as Canadians," he is to say in his speech. He will ask Canadians to rely on their "wisdom and patience" in these trying times.

Joe Clark, the Conservative Leader, yesterday berated the Prime Minister for a "faint-hearted" response in the immediate aftermath of the attack, saying he should have come out strongly in support of Washington.

"I support military participation. I believe we have to take a very good look at our immigration laws. I think we have to take a very close look at airport security on the ground and in the air," Mr. Clark said.

Stockwell Day, the Canadian Alliance Leader, has also criticized the Prime Minister for not taking a tougher stand and unequivocally promising military aid to the United States.

 

[Yard Ape]

Terrorist cells span 34 countries

By JOHN STACKHOUSE
From Monday‘s Globe and Mail

From Afghanistan to Canada, Osama bin Laden has assembled a network of terrorist cells that is so disciplined and well-funded that it would certainly survive his death or capture.

As well as thousands of armed supporters in Afghanistan, where he is widely believed to be hiding, Mr. bin Laden has a coalition of militant allies in as many as 34 countries, including Canada, intelligence reports say. His personal support may be far greater, with a cult following in many countries.

A U.S. congressional report made public last week called Mr. bin Laden‘s network "a global threat."

"In building this network, bin Laden has assembled a coalition of disparate radical Islamic groups of varying nationalities to work toward common goals - the expulsion of non-Muslim control or influence from Muslim-inhabited countries," a report by the Congressional Research Service says.

Terrorist experts note that Mr. bin Laden‘s network, rather than relying only on guerrilla fighters, has attracted well-educated and well-travelled followers who can slip easily into Western society.

A British newspaper reported Monday that a European terrorist cell linked to Mr. bin Laden attempted to launch a sarin gas attack on the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, last February.

The attack was due to take place during a parliamentary session when 625 Euro-MPs and scores of officials would have been in the building. But German police foiled the attempt after breaking up the cell, which included Algerian members and operated in London, Frankfurt and Milan.

Six men based in Britain were arrested and charged under that country‘s Prevention of Terrorism Act, but later released so they could be monitored, the paper reported.

The congressional report puts Mr. bin Laden‘s financial worth at $300-million (U.S.), and the size of his Al-Qaeda (The Base) network at 3,000 Islamic militants. It says Al-Qaeda has cells in most major Muslim countries, as well as Canada, the United States and Britain.

Rather than direct these cells or affiliates, Mr. bin Laden is believed to accept proposals for militant activities that he might consider funding or arming. All of the so-called projects must be linked to Al-Qaeda‘s ultimate goal, which is believed to be the destruction of the West in retaliation for its policies in the Middle East and Arab world.

While the autonomous cells might suffer financially and logistically if Mr. bin Laden were killed or captured, there is another risk: that his stature in many Islamic countries would only grow. Millions already view him as a Rambo of the Muslim world.

Mr. bin Laden has built his stature with a sophisticated media network that originally relied on interviews with U.S. television from his Afghanistan hideout.

But in the past 18 months, he appears to have developed a new tactic, using a personal video crew that films him in favourable settings - usually shooting a gun or riding a horse - then distributes the footage to Arab broadcasters.

North American and European networks almost always pick up the clips, without knowing his whereabouts.

U.S. President George W. Bush tried to lay to rest fears that Mr. bin Laden may already have slipped out of Afghanistan. Reports last week said the fugitive had already relocated his base to the southern Philippines, where Muslim separatists have well-fortified camps.

"If he thinks he can hide from the United States and our allies, he will be sorely mistaken," Mr. Bush said.

The Taliban representative in the United Arab Emirates, Aziz Al-Rahman, said this weekend that Mr. bin Laden remains "the guest of our people" in Afghanistan.

Mr. bin Laden‘s family was quoted in a Saudi-owned London newspaper on Saturday condemning the attacks, saying they contradict the teachings of Islam. The family said it cut all ties with Mr. bin Laden in 1994, when he was accused of mounting attacks on the Saudi government.

 

[Yard Ape]

The UK‘s military options
Monday, 17 September, 2001, 17:18 GMT 18:18 UK
By BBC defence correspondent Jonathan Marcus

Britain has given the strongest backing yet to President George Bush out of all of Washington‘s European allies.

Britain is also a key player in welding together a much broader coalition to back US military action but could British help include practical military assistance?

Much depends upon what the Americans decide to do but it is clear that there are a number of areas where Britain could perhaps help.

What is driving the speculation about a British military role is the fact that preparations are currently under way for one of the largest ever British military exercises in the Gulf.

Troop deployment

Up to 6,000 British troops are being deployed to Oman in an operation called "Saif Sareea Two" and involving ground, air and naval forces.

The bulk of the British troops comprise an armoured brigade with headquarters and supporting elements.

A strong naval force is also already on its way to the Gulf region - some 24 surface ships in all, together with two submarines.

Among the vessels are the aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious, with both Navy Sea Harriers and RAF Harrier GR7s on board, the helicopter carrier HMS Ocean and the assault ship HMS Fearless.

Royal Marines from 3 Commando Brigade will be staging landings on the Omani coast and over 30 combat aircraft are also due to take part in the exercise, which extends through to October.

The troops are arriving in Oman over the next few days and the naval element is currently in the Mediterranean.

According to the Ministry of Defence in London, everything is going as planned except that some key elements of the Joint Forces Headquarters that were intending to deploy to Oman are now staying in Britain.

Potent military force

All this represents a potent military force but it is far from clear how relevant it is to the sort of operation the Pentagon may have in mind.

One of the two submarines, HMS Trafalgar, is capable of firing land attack cruise missiles, and the carrier-borne aircraft could theoretically take part in any joint operation with US warplanes.

But the Americans may want British assistance in another area.

The US military was hugely impressed by SAS operations behind Iraqi lines during the Gulf War.

Some in the SAS already have experience of operating in northern Pakistan.

While no defence sources venture any comment on special forces operations, this may be the critical area where British help and experience is most needed.

 

[Yard Ape]

NATO invokes mutual defence clause
By OLIVER MOORE
With reports from John Stackhouse and Associated Press
Globe and Mail Update
Tuesday, 02 October 2001

Washington has started to show its allies the evidence it says implicates Afghan-based extremist Osama bin Laden in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Calling the evidence he has seen "conclusive," NATO Secretary-General George Robertson cleared the way for collective retaliation from NATO countries.

NATO "knows that the individuals who carried out these attacks were part of the worldwide terrorist network al-Qaeda, headed by Osama bin Laden," Lord Robertson told a news conference.

The announcement came only hours before British Prime Minister Tony Blair is expected to outline and defend the imminent military campaign against Afghanistan‘s ruling Taliban at the Labour Party‘s annual conference in Brighton on Tuesday. He is to stress that the attacks will be limited to the Taliban‘s military positions, key installations and its meagre air force, according to an advance draft of his speech.

"[The Taliban] had the chance to surrender the terrorists. They chose not to," the text says. "We will eliminate their hardware, disrupt their supplies and target their troops," it adds, stressing that civilian targets will be avoided.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told the BBC on Tuesday that "military action, as the Prime Minister will be saying, may well have to be used unless there is some dramatic change of mind by the Taliban.

"But we are all very clear that it has to be proportionate, it has to be directed and it has to be backed by a much wider program to try to end this kind of instability.

"Let us be clear," Mr. Straw said, "the target of any military action that is taken is about the al-Qaeda organization, Osama bin Laden and those around him. The Taliban up to now have been sheltering them."

Mr. Straw‘s words came soon after an even starker warning from former Taliban ally Pakistan. Military ruler General Pervez Musharraf told the BBC on Monday that mediation has failed. Asked whether the Taliban‘s days are numbered, he replied: "It appears so."

Lord Robertson told a classified briefing given to NATO‘s ruling council by U.S. Ambassador at Large Francis X. Taylor that "it is clear that all roads lead to al-Qaeda and pinpoint Osama bin Laden as having been involved in it."

Saying that the alliance is satisfied that the attack was directed from abroad, Lord Robertson said it was therefore covered by NATO‘s Article 5, which says that an attack on one member is an attack on all.

"The United States of American can rely on the full support of its 18 NATO allies in the campaign against international terrorism." Lord Robertson said.

He added, though, that immediate military retaliation is by no means a sure thing. "We don‘t intend at the moment to discuss how NATO will translate this decision into operational action."

Several thousand Afghans rallied Tuesday in the Taliban home base of Kandahar, shouting anti-U.S. chants.

The isolated Taliban appears to be seeking whatever allies it can find. The Foreign Ministry is planning a delegation to neighbouring Iran. While Iran is no friend of the Taliban, its government has refused to join the U.S.-led coalition against terrorism and has termed U.S. behaviour "disgusting."

Taliban officials have repeatedly said they are not afraid of U.S. military action, and the rally in Kandahar, the southern city where the Taliban was formed, appeared meant to underscore that defiance.

The growing expectation of an air attack was bolstered by an Iranian defence report of 41 U.S. and British warships now in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, carrying airplanes, attack helicopters and missiles that are within striking distance of Afghanistan. The U.S. aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk is also on its way to the region from its base in Tokyo, while Uzbekistan, which borders northern Afghanistan, said Monday that its airspace will be open to U.S. military flights.

Mr. bin Laden emerged quickly as the prime suspect in last month‘s aerial attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. He has denied responsibility, and the Taliban has refused to give him up to the West without clear evidence of his involvement. Hesitant at first to provide evidence that might jeopardize the investigation or imperil possible sources within the terrorist network, Washington has now agreed to roll out evidence to its allies gradually.

The attacks have helped cut short years of United Nations argument over the critical question: Who is a terrorist? Calling for "moral clarity," Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Monday urged the General Assembly to come to an agreement and adopt a comprehensive convention.

Numerous nations backed his call for the General Assembly to break the definition deadlock. According to the UN‘s chief lawyer, Hans Corell, the problem is one of differentiating between terrorism and the right to self-determination and combat foreign occupation

"Terrorism as we have seen it Sept. 11 is clear. Anything of this sort, which smells, looks and maybe tastes like terrorism is clear," Nasser Al-Kidwa, the Palestinian UN observer, said. "Issues of wars, armed conflict, foreign occupation, recognized as such by the international community, by the Security Council — those are governed by international humanitarian law, by Geneva conventions, so it‘s a different issue."

"I understand the need for legal precision," Mr. Annan told the opening of a week-long assembly debate on terrorism. "But let me say frankly that there is also a need for moral clarity.

"There can be no acceptance of those who would seek to justify the deliberate taking of innocent civilian life, regardless of cause or grievance. If there is one universal principle that all peoples can agree on, surely it is this."

"Our job now is to confront and eradicate terrorism pure and simple: the use of violence without honour, discrimination or regard for human decency," British Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock said.

 

[Yard Ape]

U.S. sends military aid request to NATO
By PAUL KNOX
Globe & Mail
With reports from Reuters, AP, AFP
Thursday, October 4, 2001

Step aside, back us up and let us do the job.

That sums up the United States‘ request to NATO for military assistance in its campaign against accused terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and his Afghan protectors.

A day after the North Atlantic Treaty Organization formally invoked Article 5 of its founding treaty, declaring that one of its members had suffered an external attack and was entitled to assistance, alliance spokesman Yves Brodeur said in Brussels that Washington had delivered a list of aid requests.

He did not give details. But German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said the U.S. shopping list presented yesterday included unlimited use of allies‘ air space, as well as the use of some air bases, fuel pipelines and NATO spy planes.

Belgian Defence Minister André Flahaut said NATO had been asked to provide AWACS surveillance aircraft -- presumably a fleet of the modified Boeing 747 planes operated by the 19-member alliance.

Their statements, together with what is known of individual U.S. requests to allies, appeared to confirm that Washington will not ask most NATO members for large-scale military contributions.

"They‘re already getting what they need from Britain in terms of military firepower," said Fen Hampson, a specialist on international security at Carleton University in Ottawa.

Britain has been the United States‘ most outspoken ally since the Sept. 11 air attacks on New York and Washington that led President George W. Bush to launch what he calls a war on terrorism.

Thousands of soldiers from Britain and the Persian Gulf state of Oman began long-planned exercises on Monday. Two U.S. aircraft carriers assigned to the U.S. Navy‘s Fifth Fleet are now in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea, and a third is en route to the Mediterranean.

In all, more than 30,000 U.S. and British troops are believed to be in the region along with 30 warships.

France has warships in the Indian Ocean, and has said the ships will be used to supply and protect U.S. forces. Germany is reported to have elite commando troops capable of operating inside Afghanistan, where Mr. bin Laden is believed to be in hiding.

U.S. officials have suggested that allies with less military strength, such as Canada, could be asked to fill in for U.S. peacekeeping troops in the Balkans if they are redeployed.

Despite the invoking of Article 5, there is no sign the United States wants NATO involved in joint planning of military operations.

Absolute U.S. command is not likely to be a sore point with most alliance members. But France traditionally insists on a command role when its forces are asked to take military action.

 

[Yard Ape]

NATO seeks Canadian troops for the Balkans
Would ‘backfill‘ in Bosnia and Kosovo, freeing U.S. soldiers to go to Middle East

By JEFF SALLOT
The Globe & Mail
Tuesday, October 9, 2001

OTTAWA -- George Robertson, the Secretary-General of NATO, says he expects Canada will send fresh ground troops to support the alliance‘s peacekeeping missions in the Balkans so that U.S. troops can move on to possible Middle Eastern combat.

It is an idea that was first floated by Washington and has been under consideration by Ottawa for more than a week. But it was not among the military commitments announced yesterday by the government to help the United States in the antiterrorism campaign.

Lord Robertson is to meet Prime Minister Jean Chrétien in the nation‘s capital today, making the request for Canadian ground troops in the Balkans hard on the heels of Ottawa‘s announcement that it is sending naval and air forces to the Middle East.

Lord Robertson said he thinks Mr. Chrétien will agree. "I‘ve got indications that the Canadians would be willing to do that if they were asked to do it."

He added, "It might be that the Prime Minister will be volunteering."

Lord Robertson said he‘s not shy about asking Canada and other countries in the 19-country North Atlantic Treaty Organization alliance to help "backfill" the operations in Bosnia and Kosovo.

Canada has about 1,600 soldiers serving with NATO in Bosnia. But the Canadian Forces were forced to withdraw from Kosovo last year because the army was overextended.

The United States has about 10,000 troops in the Balkans. The Pentagon had been interested in shedding the peacekeeping missions even before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

Many military analysts say it will be difficult for Canada to deploy more soldiers to the Balkans without extending the tours of duty.

At the moment, a Balkans tour lasts six months, after which the soldier is supposed to be back home for 18 months. Extending tours to 12 months would allow Canada to make a larger commitment.

The Canadian Forces might also have to call up additional reservists to fill out army units. About 20 per cent of the troops in the Canadian Kosovo contingent are reserve soldiers.

Lord Robertson, who once compared Canadian defence budgets unfavourably to other NATO countries, was effusive in his praise of Canada on the eve of his meeting with Mr. Chrétien.

Yesterday‘s announcement of ships and aircraft for the Middle East shows that "Canada yet again proves to be a stalwart ally in times of trouble," he said.

Unlike the Kosovo air campaign two years ago, NATO is not taking the lead role in the operations against terrorists believed to be hiding in Afghanistan.

"We are not in the lead. We do not seek to be in the lead," Lord Robertson said in an interview with Canadian journalists at the government guest house across the road from 24 Sussex Dr.

Nevertheless, Lord Robertson said, NATO is "acutely relevant" in the campaign.

NATO is moving a joint naval task force from the western part of the Mediterranean to the east, closer to Middle East hot spots, he added.

NATO is unlikely to be directly involved in planning and executing military operations in the antiterrorism campaign, many analysts believe.

They say U.S. military and political officials don‘t like NATO‘s cumbersome decision-making process, requiring a consensus among the 19 members.

Lord Robertson and Mr. Chrétien are scheduled to address the NATO Parliamentary Association in Ottawa today.