Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Eastern Europe Cautiously Welcomes Larger U.S. Military Presence


BUDAPEST — The Obama administration’s plans to quadruple military spending in Central and Eastern Europe, largely in response to recent aggression in Ukraine and elsewhere by President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, were greeted warmly but warily in the region on Tuesday.

“It is clear that the European Union can no longer adequately respond to Russia’s demonstrations of power, so it is comforting that at least the United States is finally stepping up,” Roman Kuzniar, a professor at the Institute of International Relations at the University of Warsaw, said Tuesday.

Mr. Putin’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and his continued support for pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine — along with provocative incursions into Ukraine’s airspace, increased submarine patrols and military maneuvers near Russia’s western borders — have unsettled many of the former Communist states in the region and have led to increasing demands for a concrete Western response. The news from Washington was welcomed by several government officials.


“We appreciate President Obama’s decision to boost funding for an increased U.S. military presence on the territory of NATO’s front-line allies,” the Czech Defense Ministry said in a statement on Tuesday. “The U.S. is the leader of the Atlantic alliance and has an indispensable role in making its collective deterrent sufficiently robust and credible.”

Raimonds Bergmanis, the Latvian defense minister, said in a statement on Tuesday, “Deterrence is what we are after, and a decision by the U.S. authorities to preposition equipment in Central and Eastern Europe would send a clear message of resolve and determination.”

Analysts said Mr. Putin was likely to respond with a buildup of his own, although they doubted that it would inspire a new arms race.

“Russia will not welcome the strengthening of the American contingent in Europe at the time when, regardless of the overall political difficulties, there is no risk of a direct military confrontation with NATO,” said Igor Korotchenko, editor in chief of the Russian magazine National Defense. “This will make the system in Europe more unbalanced. It is one thing when the Americans deploy their forces in Spain, but it is very different when they deploy them in Poland, Romania or the Baltic States.”

Still, Mr. Korotchenko added, “the response will not be hysteric.”

Western officials had previously announced at a NATO summit meeting in Wales plans to build military supply bases and to station troops in Eastern Europe to bolster NATO’s ability to respond rapidly in the event of Russian aggression.

The Obama administration is proposing more than $3.4 billion in military spending in the region next year — far more than the $786 million in the current budget — and will position new equipment and have a full armored combat brigade deployed somewhere in the region, on a rotating basis, at all times.

Administration officials argued that the rotating deployment would keep the United States in compliance with the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997, under which both sides promised not to station large numbers of troops along borders shared by Russia and members of the alliance.

Government leaders in Poland and the Baltic nations have argued that Russia’s aggressive actions in Ukraine have already violated the act, and they urged American leaders to station permanent troops in the region. Poland’s new right-wing government, in particular, has made the deployment of NATO troops in the region a major foreign policy goal.

This summer’s NATO summit meeting will be held in Warsaw, and the American proposal anticipates some of the demands likely to be raised.

 “It seems that they have finally realized that their previously weaker interest in this part of Europe hadn’t done them any favors,” said Lukasz Kister, a security and foreign policy expert from the Collegium Civitas in Warsaw. “This decision will try to make up for that.”

Radko Hokovsky, executive director of European Values, a research organization in Prague, said he hoped that allies in Europe would respond to the United States’ example. “Europeans really need to step up their defense efforts so that they are not like a child always waiting for an American mom to come save them because they are so lazy to spend their wealth on their own security,” he said.

Despite Russian aggression, European military spending has dropped in each of the past three years, according to the NATO 2015 annual report. Although the alliance asks its member states to contribute 2 percent of gross domestic product to military purposes, only a few countries in Europe do.

“Russia is still strongly perceived as a threat, and bolder U.S. moves and capabilities would be most welcomed,” said Radu Magdin, a political analyst in Bucharest, Romania.

Romania, Poland and the Baltics have been especially vocal in criticizing Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its continuing support of separatists in eastern Ukraine.

“This is not signaling a return to Cold War-era deterrence, which relied on a very heavy U.S. military buildup in Europe,” said Eoin Micheál McNamara, a NATO specialist at the University of Tartu in Estonia. Instead, he said the increased American commitment is “an important down payment on the new-style U.S. deterrence posture in Eastern Europe.”

Not everyone will react positively to a larger American military presence, analysts said. In some countries, like the Czech Republic, where some leaders have increasingly made overtures to Moscow, the move may be seen as counterproductive.

“The tone in the country is increasingly being set by the president, Milos Zeman, who speaks openly of ending the sanctions against Russia and would see this as a step in the opposite direction,” said Erik Best, the American-born, Prague-based author of The Fleet Sheet, an online political and business journal.

In Moscow, analysts tried Tuesday morning to predict Mr. Putin’s reaction. They agreed that it would almost certainly involve increasing troops and equipment along the country’s western border.

“What will happen is that, on the one hand, Russia will further develop its military infrastructure in the western regions that was underdeveloped only five years ago,” said Ruslan Pukhov, head of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies. “On the other, the new weapons will be deployed in Russia’s west, instead of east.”

Mr. Korotchenko agreed that new weapons systems would probably be deployed in the region, but he did not expect there to be a major increase in Russian military spending — something the Kremlin might be hard-pressed to support with low oil prices and international sanctions hobbling the Russian economy.

“We remember well how the arms race ended for the Soviet Union,” Mr. Korotchenko said. “We will not make the same mistake twice.”



No comments:

Post a Comment