It may be an ugly American trait to be critical of Europe’s military muscularity, and we no doubt have wanted a relatively neutered Europe for a variety of reasons. I think Europe has benefited greatly from their dependency, not just culturally in an “unlearning war” kind of way, but also financially because they could devote their resources to more humanistic endeavors. And America has enjoyed a stable Europe that was even able to unify at the end of the Cold War with no problems outside of Yugoslavia. It was a good investment for America, and it has made the world a much better and safer place.
But, at some point, this has to end. It may sound patronizing or condescending, but Europe is all grown up now. And, if they want to continue to rely on a strong America, they need to realize that we’ve overextended ourselves, weakened ourselves economically, and that we have to scale back our commitments and responsibilities. The actions in Libya are a good start at rolling out this new dynamic, but I have to give credit to Robert Gates for telling it like it is.
Mr. Gates slammed NATO nations for failing to meet their commitments in Afghanistan — or for imposing sweeping restrictions on those forces they do send — which he said hobbled the mission.
And despite NATO’s decision to take command of the air war in Libya, the alliance is running out of bombs after just 11 weeks, he said. The operation would fall apart without a continued large infusion of American support, Mr. Gates added, since other NATO nations have not invested in the weapons required to carry out lengthy combat operations.
Perhaps most significantly, Mr. Gates issued a dire warning that the United States, exhausted by a decade of war and dreading its own mounting budget deficits, simply may not see NATO as worth supporting any longer.
“The blunt reality is that there will be dwindling appetite and patience in the U.S. Congress — and in the American body politic writ large — to expend increasingly precious funds on behalf of nations that are apparently unwilling to devote the necessary resources or make the necessary changes to be serious and capable partners in their own defense,” Mr. Gates said.
Yes, there is a degree of hypocrisy involved here, since America has fostered this situation. We’ll no doubt hear from Europeans that we’ve thwarted previous efforts at military independence. But, let’s be real. Europe hasn’t tried very hard. And now things have changed. I’m not very comfortable telling other countries that they should be spending a higher percentage of their budgets on bombs, but it’s more about the U.S. spending a vastly smaller percentage on them without costing NATO in military capabilities. If NATO can’t run an operation in a narrow strip of desert land on the Mediterranean coast for eleven weeks without running out of weapons, then they’re almost useless.
In Afghanistan, I’m willing to take the blame. We can’t expect our allies to maintain domestic support for an operation that lasts over a decade, is run poorly, and that yields few tangible results. But what concerns me is that Europe enjoys such superior social programs and quality of life, while Americans fund the biggest arsenal in the world and are expected to be the enforcement arm of both NATO and the United Nations.
Taking on this ‘exceptional’ role is certainly part of our self-identity and, particularly on the right, we are not too keen to give up our role and the license it gives us to act how we please. But I’m not happy about that either. This relationship has worked well, but it has caused some cultural distortion in both Europe and the United States. We feel we’re above the law; Europe has a false sense of moral superiority and can’t muster itself to keep the peace in its own region (Balkans, Libya).
We need to keep our alliance strong by moving closer to parity in both arms and responsibilities.
Unmentioned in all this is the degree to which we prop up their economies by having substantial bases in Europe, which serve little purpose. In fact, the only positive thing is that our military hospital in Germany has probably been responsible for saving the lives of many Americans that couldn’t be flown all the way back here.
But you can bet that if we closed down or sharply reduced our presence in Europe there would be cries of despair because of what economic losses there would be.
.
The EU invests in the United States twice as much as the US invests in the EU countries. We’re not back in the Cold War setting of large US bases in Europe, they were dismantled during the Clinton administration. The EU countries made costsavings by cutting NATO military equipment, supplies and fighter plane contracts made in the USA.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Absolutely! I guess I’m an ugly American too, but I see first hand the benefits these countries receive due to having to spend less on military defense. After WWII, it was US dollars that made it possible for the UK to have their socialized health care, the NHS. They’re now considering scrapping their nuclear program almost entirely, since they don’t need it–our nukes will protect them.
Contrary to the previous comment, I don’t think they benefit economically from having our bases here, though. None of us pay UK taxes and most military members spend more dollars on the base than they do on the economy. When the US closed a couple of Navy bases near here, the local councils were very happy to be able to tear down and build much needed housing there.
I disagree, but I agree to a point. Sure, they haven’t spent much of anything on their military’s and they need to rely on us for the funding. But how about something of equal importance: every war since WWII has been a useless war of choice, and they didn’t need to be fought.
NATO still provides a blanket: Article V, an attack on one is an attack on all. That keeps the peace whether we can back up our “threats” or not, as if a country such as Russia or China attacked they’d be fighting a shit ton more fronts. It’s still a deterrent.
Once again we see what a good decision Obama made in choosing to keep Gates on as Secretary of Defense.
Also, Kevin Drum is channeling you:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/06/has-nato-outlived-its-usefulness
Can we call this Gates’s Farewell Address to the world?
Yes, Europe was not eager to go whole hog into Iraq or Afghanistan during the Bush administration. But the Bushies used the “we wuz attacked” clause to pull them into Afghanistan against popular opinion in their nations.
According to Gates, NATO nations didn’t ask “How high?” when the US said “Jump!”
That is a totally different issue from European support of NATO. Right now, the deal is that Europe hosts US bases and the US pays for them in order to have European postings for US troops. If there is a trip wire against Russian aggression it has moved east to a line from Estonia around west of Belarus to Ukraine. Funny that there are no US troops of any number there.
Time to close the bases in Western Europe and let the EU countries through NATO stand on their own.
.
Link: World opinion and flawed polling
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Add Korea to that as well. It’s time to end our involvement in the Korean War.
.
Winning the Cold War was based on a strong economy and sound financial system of the free and democratic Western world. Since the 1980’s Reagonomics, Clinton, the Bush years and Greenspan’s exuberance has depleted the US Treasury. Look at the State of California, Texas and many more. It’s a wreck going to happen. Papa Bush at least fought the Gulf War all expenses paid by his Oil Buddies of the Arabian peninsula. The third world countries already appreciate the IMF, World Bank and previous US corporate raiders. In addition, the waste of taxpayers money to PermaGov (or the Military-Industrial-Espionage Complex) runs in de multi-billions every year. See Vanity Fair’s article on SAIC and NSA Michael Hayden’s Trailblazer project. Highly recommended reads! See also Arthur’s story about the State of the Bronx.
21st CENTURY
The US free market economy always gave direction when the world economy came out of a recession, not any more. Don’t play the blame game, in a free market economy and globalization one’s own policy leads to success or failure. Just look who owns the US debt of 14,500,000,000,000 dollars .
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
We can move closer to parity in both arms and responsibilities by cutting our military cancer to European levels as a percent of the national economy. Europe can respond as it wishes. The US has been pretty much total wackjob in its military behavior for half a century now. Why is it Europe’s or anybody else’s obligation to contribute to the insanity and deception?
What, exactly has the US saved Europe from over that half century? Nothing that comes to mind. Fighting terrorist aggression does not require swollen military budgets — in fact they are probably crippled by them. Seems to me Europe’s moral superiority is a reality in many areas. Europe’s attitude is not America’s problem. Our problem is our own history and our own gunslinger mentality.
I disagree a little bit about Afghanistan. Germany’s engagement orders apparently ban the German military from killing people. Which is nuts. I know part of the original problem was that the German military became way too GOOD at killing people, but c’mon, what’s the use of going to Afghanistan if you won’t?
In many ways, while Merkell justly deserved the egg on her face for Libya, Germany was being honest about itself and its priorities.
It’s stunning the degree to which even progressives in this country have internalized the myth of “defense” spending.
Western Europe does not need to be spending more on military (calling the military “defense” is like calling your PR department the “Ministry of Truth”). The US needs to be spending a tiny fraction of what it does. Neither needs bases all over the world. Neither needs to be in Afghanistan or Iraq or bombing the former-nice-dictator-now-a-modern-Hitler du jour.
For a fraction of what has been spent occupying (both formally and via proxy) the middle east and central asia in order to secure the carbon fields the US could have long ago converted to an economy that didn’t need those carbon fields.
We don’t need more stealth bombers and fighters. We don’t need more bunker busters. We don’t need a reserve of 6 million soldiers (counting the various stages of reserve and the branches like the guards). We don’t need more ammo, we don’t need more chem and bio and nuclear weapons, we don’t need 30,000 “information specialists” employed by the DoD. We don’t need 900+ bases in over 175 countries world wide.
We don’t need to be spending the $700 B / year we officially do on the military, nor the $100 B or so more on covert operations. We don’t need all the additional unofficial military funding, like the Interior Department providing free resources for military land, or the Energy department pretending to invest in Fusion research when it is really used to test Nuclear weapons, or the Education department funding military recruitment propoganda.
No, Gates is not right. The whole premise is wrong. Fundamentally wrong. Wrong to the same degree that the southerners were wrong about slavery and human rights. Wrong in the same fundamental way that those who argued for the divine right of kings were wrong.
what GC said. in spades…
europe has woken up to the waste of war, preferring soft power, time to trust more and use the $ for better things.
progressive italians are sick of being america’s launching pad and nuclear missile silo.
pity there’s no converse yet, of euro pols visiting washington and encouraging winding down the MIC!
our pols here are a disaster, but they are over war, except for bliar, and he’s a completely bought and sold ‘made man’.