FERAIOS SouthEast EU & Mesogaia INVESTMENT FUND

Sunday, June 28, 2026

REBRANDING NATO

POLITES,CITIZENS,METAPOLITANS,

MATRIOTS&PATRIOTS,DEMOCRATS(direct),

DEAR READERS,CHAIRESTHAI,

OUR EUROPEAN&MEDITERRANEAN FORCES WHICH ARE SUPPORTING THE IDEAS-PROPOSALS WHICH ARE WRITTEN HERE ARE GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE IN A GOOD CONDITION AFTER YEARS OF SUPPRESS AND INSULTS.
THE PROPOSAL FOR THE CREATION OF THE european defence community according to the treaty of 1954 IS KNOWN ALMOST EVERYWHERE IN THE CIRCLES OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE SECTOR BUT ALSO TO THE PARTIES- POLITICIANS (FERAIOS SouthEast EU & Mesogaia INVESTMENT FUND: BUILDING A PAN-EUROPEAN DEFENSE SYSTEM (PART I last- SOMETHING IS MOVING TO THE WRONG DIRECTION ).
IN THE TODAY ARTICLE IT IS GOING TO BE ANALYSED THE FUTURE ROLE OF NATO AS PART OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED PROPOSAL.AT THE PREVIOUS ARTICLES WERE MENTIONED THE 3 MAIN ACTS WHICH WILL PROVIDE A BETTER FUTURE FOR THIS INSTITUTION GIVING IT A SCOPE FOR THE CENTURY TO COME.

THE PREVIOUS WORLD WHICH NATO WAS SERVING IS ENDING SOONER OR LATER AND THE EUROPEAN&MEDITERRANEAN COSMOS IS LOOSING ITS INFLUENCE AT A GLOBAL SCALE.THE LATEST USA ADMINISTRATION HAS SEEN THIS CHANGE AND IS EXPRESSING POLICIES WHICH ARE PROVING THE WRONG DIRECTION OF THE GLOBALISTS IDEAS(The World Transformed and No One in America Noticed - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization).

THE CURRENT AMERICAN POLICY IS WORKING IN ORDER TO BE SAVED AS MANY THEY CAN FROM THE PREVIOUS WORLD WHICH WAS BASED ON DOLLAR DOMINATION TO THE WORLD ECONOMICS.

our vision for another world which is being expressed in written by the eCO(h)HUMENIC THEORY OFFERS SOLUTIONS FOR ALL THE GrAEAN(earthean) CITIZENS.

NATO WAS MORE OR LESS A SUCCESFUL ALLIANCE FOR THE 20TH -BEGINNING OF 21 CENTURIES WITH THE EXCEPTION FOR SOME CRUELTIES WHICH PUT THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION TO BE SCEPTICAL FOR THIS DEFENCE ORGANISATION.

THE GOVERNING ELITES CANT DECIDE WHAT WILL BE THE FUTURE OF THIS INSTITUTION BUT IT SEEMS THAT THEY PREFER A Dormant NATO (What the next NATO might look like).

OUR POLITICAL THINKING WHICH IS BASED MAINLY ON CITIZENS BENEFITS IS CONSULTING FOR A REBRANDING COMBINED WITH THE CREATION OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE COMMUNITY (treaty of 1954) AND DRASTIC BUDGETARY REDUCTION FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION.

the nato rebranding SHOULD BE FOCUSED IN:

A)CHANGING THE NAME TO A NEW ONE WHICH WILL SERVE THE PURPOSE OF ITS NEW MISSION.
it is for sure that nato isnt any more a north atlantic alliance

THE NEW NAME WILL BRING FRESH SPIRIT OUT OF THE MISTAKES OF THE PAST WHICH HAVE OCCURED BY THE REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRATIC STATES.

B)ENTERING NEW MEMBERS WILL BRING ONLY BENEFITS

these incoming members have to follow pre-entrance policies in order to be harmonised their standards and join the coalition

THE BUDGETS WHICH WILL BE PROVIDED WILL ASSIST THE CURRENT NATOs BUDGET WITHOUT THE NEED FOR THE OLDER MEMBERS TO AUGMENT THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ALLIANCE(NATO's 5% of GDP Military Expenditures Is a 100% Indefensible and Stupid Idea - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization).

C)TRANSFERING THE HEADQUARTES OUTSIDE THE EUROPEAN BORDERS

inside our frontiers the european defence community will take care

BY THIS WAY THE ALLIANCE CAN BE CLOSER TO THE ENDANGERED-INSTABILISED ZONES SO THAT PERMANENT PEACE TO BE KEPT AND ECONOMIC PROSPERITY TO HAPPEN FOR THE LOCAL ECONOMIES WHERE THE HEADQUARTERS ARE BASED(our proposal written at previous articles for turkey was posed before some years).

THE MAIN GOAL OF NATO WITH ITS INSTITUTIONAL ACT WAS TO PROTECT THE SO CALLED DEMOCRATIC REGIMES FROM THE SOVIET COMMUNIST DANGERS.NOWADAYS THE MYTH OF THE COMMUNISTS PROSPERITY HAS LOST ITS POWER TO THE CITIZENS DUE TO THE DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT.
THE CONSEQUENCES FOR THE AUTHORITARIAN REGIMES WERE THAT THE SOVIET MODEL COLLAPSED AND CHINA REMAINED THE MAIN REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS OLD SYSTEM.

THE CHINESE COMMUNISTS KEPT THEIR ABSOLUTE ECONOMIC IDEOLOGY OF MARXISM-LENISM-MAOISM BY PERMITTING TO THE CAPITALISM TO ENERGIZE THE VITALITY OF CHINAs ECONOMY AND GUIDING THEIR SYSTEM TO A STATE-CAPITALISM VERSION WITH NATIONAL PRIORITIES AND INTERESTS.

CUBA SEEMS TO FOLLOW THEIR PARADIGM IN ORDER THIS STALINIST-KASTRO REGIME TO CONTINUE TO EXIST.
this succesful chinese model by keeping alive the confucian philosophy looks to be the protagonist of the ex socialist epoc towards the change(Cuban lawmakers approve sweeping reforms to socialist model amid US pressure | Reuters).

ON THE CONTRARY THE RUSSIAN EX SOVIET MODEL KEPT ITS COMMUNISTIC PARTY AS A SECONDARY POWER CLOSE TO THE NATIONALISTIC PARTY APPROACH WHICH GOVERNS THE RUSSIAN STATE FOR THE LAST QUARTER OF THE CENTURY.THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE SOVIET ERA WERE KEPT BY BEING MODERNISED FROM THE CAPITALISTIC IDEAS FOR MARKET LIBERATION AND OLIGARCHIC CONQUER OF THE MAIN NATURAL RESOURCES.

THE ALLIANCE OF ALL THESE NATIONAL COMMUNISTS IS BECOMING STRONGER DAY BY DAY TO ALL THE SECTORS OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMY BY THE INSTITUTION OF THE BRICS and lately by their influence on the asean issues.

THE WESTERN POWERS ON THE CONTRARY BEING FORGOTTEN IN THEIR GLORY OF THE PAST AND BEING CORRUPTED BY THE ALLAZONY OF TODAY ARE LOSING THE GROUND UNDER THEIR FEET.
THE SLOGAN OF THE USA ADMINISTRATION FOR MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN SHOWS THIS DECLINE OF THEIR POWER AND SOME EFFORTS TO DIRECT THE GLOBALISTS APPROACHES TO OTHER FIELDS OF COOPERATION WONT WORK BY THE SAME MEANING WITH THE PAST.

THE GLOBALISTS POLICIES NOWADAYS ARE BEING EXPRESSED BY THE EUROPEAN ELITES AND THE CHINESE REGIME.

THEY CONTINUE TO BELIEVE IN ONE WORLD GOVERNANCE AND IMPLEMENT THEIR IDEAS FOR THE DECISIONS TAKEN AT DAVOS AND OTHER CENTRES OF THEIR POWER WHICH ARE CONTROLLED BY THE ZIONISTS.
THESE ELITES BEGUN FROM 1980 TO DISCUSS ABOUT REFORMING NATO IN THE WAY THAT IT IS PRESENTED TODAY(NATO's Future: Beyond Collective Defense).

LATELY IN PARALLEL TO OUR PROPOSAL FOR THE CREATION OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE COMMUNITY WHICH THE FOUNDING FATHERS EVISIONED IN 1954 ,THEY PROMOTE INSIDE THE LEGAL SCHEME OF THE EUROPEAN UNION THE IDEA FOR THE EUROPEAN NATO.A COMPLICATED PROPOSAL WITHOUT ANY MEANING AND A USE OF A TERMINOLOGY FROM THE PREVIOUS CENTURY (Defence: Europe needs a plan B for NATO) WHERE USA INSPECTS.
that's why our consultation is better because the european defence community will be independant when the european union cannot

THE AMERICAN USA ELITES ARE CULTIVATING THIS IDEA SINCE 2000(The Future of NATO - Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft) BECAUSE THEY CANT AFFORD ANYMORE THEIR ATTENDANCE TO OUR EUROPEAN CONTINENT WHEN AT THE SAME TIME THEIR MISTAKES AT FAR EAST OBLIGES THEM TO FOCUS AT THIS TERRITORY.

THE MISSION FOR THE NEW NATO SHOULD BE CHANGED BY GIVING IT A BROADER PERSPECTIVE OUTSIDE OF THE EUROPEAN BORDERS.
THE STABILISATION OF MIDDLE EAST AND THE NEED FOR A PEACE KEEPER MIGHT BE ASSISTED BY NEW MEMBERS FROM THE TERRITORY LIKE ISRAEL,JORDAN,EGYPT AND OTHER STATES WHO ARE WILLING TO TAKE PART TO THE ALLIANCE.

NORTHERN,EAST AND WEST AFRICA SHOULD BE IN THE RADIUS OF THE ORGANIZATION WHICH TOGETHER WITH THE AFRICA UNION AND THE UNITED NATIONS WILL DIRECT THE AFRICAN CONTINENT TO A PEACEFULL NEW EPOC.

THE ATLANTIC OCEAN WILL REMAIN A SECURE PASSAGE FOR ALL NATIONS WITH GREENLAND BEING THE CENTRE FOR THE ATLANTIC COOPERATION.

WE AS EUROPEANS&MEDITERRANEANS WE HAVE TO SUPPORT OUR PROPOSAL TO THE CITIZENS FOR THE REBRANDING&REFORMATION OF NATO COMBINED WITH THE EVOLUTION OF THE TREATY OF 1954 IN A MODERNISED WAY FOR THE CREATION OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE COMMUNITY.

IN THIS WAY THE EUROPEAN UNION WILL ACT AS AN ECONOMIC POWER AND WILL ASSIST THE ENDEAVOURS OF THE REBRANDED NATO IN PARALLEL WITH THE NEW ENTITY OF THE EUROPEAN DEFENCE COMMUNITY.
THE FOUNDERS VISION WAS OUT OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE AMERICAN CONTINENT THAT IS WHY THEY ENVISIONED 2-3 DIFFERENT INSTITUTIONAL TOOLS WHICH SHOULD GUIDE TO THE POLITICAL INTERGRATION OF EUROPEAN&MEDITERRANEAN PEOPLES,NATIONS,CITIZENS.

WHEN WE BEGAN THE DISCUSSION FOR EUROPEs DEFENCE AND NATO TRANSFORMATION SOME YEARS AGO(2010) THEY THOUGHT THAT THIS WAS INEVITABLE BUT IT SEEMS THAT ONCE MORE WE WERE RIGHT.

THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE WRITER OF THIS TEXT IS BASED ON

THE FOUNDERS VISION FOR EUROPE,

THE RESPECT TO THE WORK DONE BY THE EUROPEAN UNION

AND THE RECOGNITION ABOUT NATO THAT ASSISTED THE PEACE IN EUROPE FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME.

it is our time for acting and guiding europe's nations,peoples,citizens to glory has come

WE THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE AND SUPPORT ALL THESE YEARS

HYGEIAINETE

A.C.

Labels: defence

Friday, September 24, 2010

IN EUROPEAN E-GOVERNMENT SERVICES ,SHOULDN'T BE INCLUDED ALSO E-DEFENCE ?

CLICKING ON THE TITLE YOU ARE REDIRECTED TO ANOTHER IMPORTANT ARTICLE

Making the citizen heard in security research

View more presentations from Ian Brown.

White House reviews nation's cybersecurity

The White House is reviewing whether to ask for new authorities for the Defense Department and other government agencies to ensure that the nation's critical computer systems are protected in the event of a major attack, the commander of the Pentagon's new Cyber Command said Thursday.
If an adversary were to penetrate the U.S. power grid or other critical systems with an "unknown capability," those systems probably would "shut down," Gen. Keith Alexander told members of the House Armed Services Committee.

Cyber Command is tasked with protecting only military computer networks. "It is not my mission to defend, today, the entire nation," Alexander said.

Deciding who should execute what role in defending the nation against cyberattack is a thorny issue, complicated by the fact that the agency tasked with assisting the private sector - the Department of Homeland Security - lags the Defense Department in personnel, resources and capabilities.

Alexander said the White House is discussing how to form a team with the FBI, Cyber Command, DHS and other agencies to "ensure that everybody has the exact authorities and capabilities that they would need to protect the country." The White House may have to ask Congress for new authorities.

The $120 million Cyber Command was launched in May and will be fully operational on Oct. 1.

MORE AT http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/23/AR2010092305431.html

IN EU WE ARE MAINLY HAVE TWO ORGANIZATIONS WHICH ARE HANDLING CYBER SECURITY THEMES

A)INSTITUTE FOR PROSPECTIVE TECHNOLOGICAL STUDIES (IPTS )
cybersecurity.jrc.ec.europa.eu

AND

B)EUROPEASN NETWORK AND INFORMATION SECURITY AGENCY (ENISA)
www.enisa.europa.eu

EU cybersecurity policy

This morning I gave the following invited speech to a session of the European Parliament's industry committee, which was considering a draft report on the Commission's recent Communication on Internet Governance. Also speaking was Ambassador Janis Karklis, chairman of ICANN's Government Advisory Committee; Frederic Donck from the Internet Society; and Prof. Adrian Cheok, director of the National University of Singapore's Mixed Reality Lab. Due to technical difficulties (!) the Internet Governance Forum secretariat's executive coordinator, Markus Kummer, was unable to participate remotely as planned.

Internet governance and cybersecurity

Clearly, European society is increasingly dependent on the Internet and related communications systems. But the security of those systems is not yet at a level appropriate for that dependence. Mr Sosa Wagner's draft report is right to stress the importance of improving the "availability, robustness and resilience" of critical information infrastructures.

The Commission and the Parliament have taken some important steps in improving this situation, especially through the recent telecoms reform package and its obligation for operators to identify risks and ensure continuity of service. I want to outline five key additional steps that the EU should take towards this goal (many of which are being discussed by the institutions):
Bring member states up to a common high level on cybersecurity, with national Computer Emergency Response Teams or networks of sectoral teams. The European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) should continue to develop forums for information-sharing, and provide support to less capable member states.

Further increase the effectiveness of ENISA, which needs significantly greater resources. With the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty, ENISA should be able to take action on former third pillar matters such as criminal use of Internet.

Ensure the resilience of key industry sectors through appropriate regulation. There should be further discussion of the designation of critical information infrastructures under Council Directive 2008/114/EC (while addressing concerns over information sharing), and requiring isolation of critical utility systems from public networks.

Widen requirements for security breach notification from communication network operators to other information society services.

Reinforce system and network diversity through competition law, state use of open standards, and procurement policy.

The Commission's Communication on Internet governance states that "the EU should take a leadership role in working towards the goal of increased security and stability of the Internet by initiating dialogue with international partners." The Commission should develop concrete plans with the Parliament and member states on what this leadership role should entail. In addition to promoting at the international level the measures I previously described, this could include:

Support for ICANN in its work to ensure the security and stability of the Domain Name System;

Work in international venues such as the OECD, United Nations and Council of Europe to improve applicable laws and national coordination on cybersecurity;

Discussions on limited liability for software security faults, particularly in the operating system and browser software that is critical to system security.

Finally, it is critical that the Parliament continues its role in promoting fundamental European values such as freedom of expression and privacy. The draft report's suggestion to extend the Rome II regulation to include violations of data protection and privacy is positive, as is the suggestion on the negotiation of international agreements for effective redress. But the EU institutions should be extremely cautious in introducing measures such as powers to revoke IP address blocks and domain names, which was suggested last week by the Council, or requiring Internet blocking (as Commissioner Malmstrom has proposed). These measures would set an extremely damaging precedent for Internet governance by repressive states that do not share European values.

IAN BROWN
May 04, 2010
SOURCE http://dooooooom.blogspot.com/