This Week at War: Moral Hazard at NATO
This Week at War: Moral Hazard at NATO
Entry Excerpt:
Europe may not be able to rely on America's free security guarantee forever.
Here is the latest edition of my column at Foreign Policy:
Topics include:
1) In blasting NATO, Gates explains what moral hazard feels like
2) The U.S. government sends its civilians to fight in Yemen
In blasting NATO, Gates explains what moral hazard feels like
In what he termed his "last policy speech as U.S. defense secretary," Robert Gates ripped into his policymaking peers at NATO headquarters in Brussels last week for allowing "significant shortcomings in NATO in military capabilities, and in political will" to occur. Gates noted that although the non-U.S. alliance members have more than 2 million troops in uniform, these countries struggle to deploy 40,000 soldiers into an effective military campaign. Gates also pointed to NATO's embarrassing performance in Libya, noting that European members, despite having a multitude of officers collecting paychecks at frivolous staff billets, have failed to generate the intelligence support and command capabilities needed to wage an effective air campaign. Gates warned of a "dismal future for the transatlantic alliance."
Gates's frustration was no doubt sparked by the realization that his department has become the victim of moral hazard. The United States provides a free security guarantee to Europe. Europeans, meanwhile, have responded in an economically rational way by taking greater risk with their external defense. With the collapse of the Soviet Union removing the last plausible military threat, it was logical for European policymakers to avoid spending on expensive space, communications, and intelligence systems that the United States was largely providing for free. Gates and many other U.S. policymakers see an alliance with too many free riders; Gates noted that only five of the 28 allies spend more than the agreed target of 2 percent of GDP on defense.
In the short term, Gates fears that the United States will have to bail out the Libya operation. This week, Adm. Mark Stanhope, Britain's top naval officer, warned that budget limits and unit rotation requirements could force NATO combatants over Libya to soon have to choose between Libya and Afghanistan. Should a shortfall of European forces in either campaign result, Gates undoubtedly fears that the United States will have to make up the gap.
Over the longer term, the moral hazard issue extends beyond NATO into the Western Pacific, the South China Sea, and soon the Persian Gulf.
Click below to read more ...
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
This Week at War: What is NATO Good For?
This Week at War: What is NATO Good For?
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
NATO: ‘Victory Has Defeated You’
NATO: ‘Victory Has Defeated You’
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
NATO Archives: First Ten Years Now Online
NATO Archives: First Ten Years Now Online
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
Needed: A New NATO for the 21st Century
Needed: A New NATO for the 21st Century
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
NATO Needs to Move Now on Crimea
NATO Needs to Move Now on Crimea
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
NATO: debating and defending Europe
There have been a considerable number of base closures in Germany. The 8th I.D., (Mech), 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Armored Divisions are no longer there. The only combat units left are the 12th CAB, 2nd Stryker Cavalry Regiment, and the 173rd Airborne BCT in Caserma Ederle, Italy. Is this a sufficient state of U.S. readiness? Consider the facts that: (1) Putin is ex-KGB with a strong desire to reestablish the Soviet Union,the fall of which he has called the worst political tragedy of the 20th Century; (2) Putin was strongly opposed to the deployment of an ABM system in Poland; and (3) Putin's support of Russian Separatists in the Ukraine has to do with Ukraine having gravitated toward NATO. The Warsaw Pact was established to create a buffer between East & West Europe. It is fair to say that Putin and Russian general officers consider Ukraine' s gravitation toward NATO as an encroachment on the former Soviet Bloc. Although a Russian motor rifle regiment/division is not the same organizationally as it was in 1980, Russia still has over 90 active divisions. The U.S. has only has 10 infantry divisions, an armored division, and an armored cavalry division. Can the U.S. depend on other NATO allies to pick up our slack in manpower and material? Russia controls gas and electric power used by Western Europe, and countries like Germany aren't willing to challenge Putin. With the current state of affairs in the Ukraine, and Putin's continued support for the Separatists coupled with sanctions to be imposed on the Russian economy, will this lead to open conflict? If it does, what is the state of readiness of U.S. 7th Army? Can that Army face down 90 Russian divisions without an expansion of the U.S. Armed Forces to World War II proportions? In its current state, U.S. 7th Army, quite frankly, doesn't have the combat power to close with the enemy by land, sea, air, or air assault to capture, kill, repel, or destroy him by means of sustained fire and maneuver. If the balloon goes up, how reliable will the NATO allies be if Putin turns off their gas and electricity as a means of economic warfare? Will they continue to fight with us, or will they turn against us??? Where would that leave us? The military fiction novel entitled "The Ten Thousand" by Harold Coyle comes to mind, without the atomic weapons possessed by a unified Germany.
NATO Chiefs Outline Plan for Dangerous World
NATO Chiefs Outline Plan for Dangerous World
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.