NATO only in name?

With the exception of a few members, NATO countries have been unwilling to commit troops to offensive operations in Afghanistan. There are too many 'fair weather members', who joined never actually believing they would undertake major operations,unless it was a defence of their their own homeland. One sometimes wonders why Czech, Hungary and Slovakia are even members of a military alliance or indeed have armies at all. Whilst there is doubt about the usefulness of their forces in offensive operations they could at least being doing more to take the strain elsewhere and with other tasks (and I am not just referring to more peace keepers for Kosovo or Bosnia).

The Canadians have once again proved themselves to be formidable soldiers prepared to undertake the toughest of tasks despite their small numbers. But there are other nations that posses great military pedigree that should be undertaking their share of combat duties. Germany is one and it is time it stopped hiding behind it's past. The limitations on it's action was there for the good of all but, in recent years Germany has used these rules for the good of itself. Germany has a sizable well equipped army. It is wasted on simple security tasks and the duties it currently performs.

Perhaps singling out Germany is unfair as they do tread a political minefield with military matters and they do have a significant number of soldiers in Afghanistan.

It is time for all NATO countries to declare what they can bring to the table. We need to identify those that can't and those that won't. Those that won't need to be named and shamed. And as for those that can't..... Well don't all taxpayers have a right to know if the army they pay for is incapable.