Tuesday, July 03, 2018

Is NATO worth keeping?

via Defense News.
The Pentagon is reportedly analyzing the costs and repercussions associated with a “large-scale withdrawal” or a “transfer of American troops stationed in Germany,” the Washington Post reported Friday.

The Post’s report was based on interviews with U.S. officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity, but who are reportedly familiar with the assessment.

The U.S. officials emphasized that the assessment is an analysis exercise and is currently limited to exploring options internally.

Top military leaders are not involved, and the Pentagon has not been tasked with taking steps to execute any option, according to the Post.
All this is part of a larger narrative.

*  The EU spends too little on defense.

*  NATO was designed to deal with an enemy that no longer exists.

*  EU Defense, NATO, and individual countries have commands that overlap and mirror.

Long short?

NATO as its currently constructed is inefficient.

NATO was built to counter the Soviet Bloc.  That Bloc is gone and in addition for every NATO command the EU Defense Group (Dept or whatever they call it) relies on the same units to fulfill the same roles.

Let's be honest.

NATO serves only one purpose.

To tie the US to Europe.  It's past time someone did a real assessment of whether that continues to make sense.

Side note.  The sad reality is this.  Planning to fight Russia is easy.  The infrastructure is setup, the allies set and the ground prepared.  So instead of planning for the probable fight against China, which will be hard as hell because all the enabling conditions have not been established, we see many defaulting to the politically expedient foe instead of the likely one.  Will we pay a price for laziness?

No comments :

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.