Defense
The Baltic States Are Not Serious About Defending Themselves
NATO
Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg speaks at the Alliance's headquarters during
a NATO foreign ministers meeting in Brussels December 2, 2014. YVES HERMAN/REUTERS
News
stories in the West contend that Russia’s increasingly aggressive behavior is
causing the Baltic states and other NATO members in Eastern Europe to become
far more serious about national defense.
There
is no doubt that tensions in the region are on the rise, including a surge of
incidents involving NATO intercepts of
Russian military aircraft operating over the Baltic Sea. The new congressional
approval of military aid to Ukraine may well increase the already alarming
level of animosity between NATO and Russia.
But
the notion that the Baltic republics have embarked on serious programs to boost
their defense capabilities in light of Moscow’s menacing behavior is vastly
overstated. The military spending of those three countries has merely moved
from minuscule to meager.
Although
all NATO members pledged after the Alliance’s summit meeting in 2006 to spend a
minimum of 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defense, few members
have actually done so. Indeed, eight years later, only the United States,
Britain, Greece, and Estonia among the 28 member states fulfill that commitment.
And
Estonia barely met that standard.
All
three Baltic governments are going to great lengths to highlight their alleged
seriousness about defense, but the actual data fail to support the propaganda.
Amid much fanfare, Estonia plans to boost its military spending from 2.0
percent of GDP to—wait for it—2.05 percent! Lithuania intends to raise
its budget next year from 0.89 percent to 1.01 percent. And Latvian leaders
solemnly pledge that their country will spend no less than 1 percent—up from
the current 0.91 percent.
The
alarmist rhetoric of the Baltic republics about the danger of Russian
aggression is not matched by their actions. Given the security situation in the
region, spending even 2 percent of GDP on defense, to say nothing of devoting 1
percent or less, is pathetic.
No
one believes that the small Baltic states could repel a Russian invasion on
their own, but it is not too much to expect that they would build military
capabilities sufficient to slow an advance and raise the costs to Moscow in
blood and treasure. Such a commitment, however, would require military outlays
at three to five times current levels. There is no indication that the Baltic
governments intend to boost spending to anything close to that
The
geographic vulnerability of the Baltic states, combined with their continuing
military weakness, should underscore to U.S. leaders that such “allies” are
strategic liabilities, not assets. Washington is drifting into confrontation
with a nuclear-armed Russia over countries that have little economic or
strategic relevance to the American republic.
U.S.
officials need to consider carefully whether it makes sense for this country to
incur such risks on behalf of so-called allies that seem unwilling even to make
serious efforts on behalf of their own defense. It is a stretch to argue that
the United States should care so much about the defense of Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania that we must be willing to risk war, but it is preposterous to argue
that we should care more about their defense than they do.
Yet
that appears to be the current situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment