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.
