NATO from a US perspective

After going through extensive security, and getting all of our electronics taken away, our group finally entered NATO headquarters, which is stationed in a suburb outside of Brussels. The building weren't quite as ominous and futuristic-looking as I might have hoped, but then again, we only saw the low security areas of the headquarters.
It was an interesting day to be going to NATO. That morning, NATO troops had been attacked in Kosovo for the first time, and the biggest NATO summit in it's history will be held in Bucharest in two weeks. So, all personell in NATO were no doubt very busy, but all of the speakers we were scheduled to see were still able to make it.
Our first speaker discussed NATO from a US perspective, and focused on what would be discussed in the Bucharest summit. She stated there were three key issues for the US in this summit.
The first was NATO as a global security provider. Right now NATO's biggest security operations are Afghanistan, and Kosovo. The US representative discussed that NATO and the US both believed that the mission in Afghanistan was working, but the US is still pushing other NATO nations to step up and send more troops. Our speaker also hoped that at this summit NATO could come up with a solid public vision document cementing why the are in Afghanistan, to discuss progress, and have a solid vision for where Afghanistan will go. NATO also has 16,000 troops in Kosovo, with the EU nations taking the lead right now. Creating the appropriate link between the US, EU, and the UN in creating a peace force for Kosovo is another important goal for the Bucharest summit.
The second key issue for the Bucharest summit are 21st century security challenges. NATO has been developing different anti-terrorism strategies since 9/11. So far, the most successful of these programs has been Operation Active Endeavor, a naval NATO mission controlling non-proliferation in the Meditteranean Sea. This is an intelligence mission in which NATO nations are able to track and/or capture any ship in the Meditteranean Sea and Suez canal which seems to be acting suspiciously. Other key security issues for NATO to face in the future are Missile Defense, and Cyber Security, and Energy Security. Funding, and placement plans for long, short, and medium-range missile defense are needed. Cyber Security and Energy Security have thus far been national interests, but the US and NATO as a whole both feel they can add value to these programs, especially Energy Security.
The third key issue is making Europe whole and free. The US thinks NATO can continue to bring peace to the balkans, thus enlarging a secure Europe, and eventually, NATO. Beyond Kosovo, resolving the Greece Macedonia conflict is important. NATO is also providing membership action plans for Ukraine, and Georgia. Conspicuously absent from the lecture, but coming up in the question and answer section was the issue of Russia. According to our speaker, Russia is not nearly as much of an issue as it is made out to be in the media. Apparently, Russia's rhetoric against NATO is mainly for political purposes only, and, in acutuality, Russia is an active member of Operation Active Endeavor, and done Missile defense planning with NATO.