At 10:48 PM 2/22/02 +1100 Brett Coster wrote:
>Europe has no need to spend anything like what the US spends. But then, I've
>argued that the US has no need to spend anywhere near what it currently
>spends, let alone what it plans to.
>
>The sooner ALL nations start spending for their own border defence, and
>limited (with a capital L) protection of external interests, the better.
>
>Frankly, if not for the US being a democracy, I'd tend to worry about the US
>military buildup even more as it absolutely reeks of Germany 1933-39: not
>the philosophy, but the extent, and the intrinsic belief that whatever the
>US wants to do should be done.
I think the key thing *is* that the US is a democracy. More importantly,
that current European policy (basically the shared foreign policy of almost
all continental, NATO, European countries) represents the "morality gap" of
the European moralists.
It was only a few years ago that the Europeans encouraged the development
of the "Clinton Doctrine", the principle that NATO would be used to
intervene on the behalf of human rights, even in places in which the UN was
too paralyzed to act. Even then, however, the decay of European military
ability meant that the US had to take the responsibility for actually
carrying out the policies advocated by the Europeans.
You argue, Brett, that military power is irrelevant in the 21st Century.
Not surprisingly, I argue just the opposite. For example, currently the
United States is basically the only nation upholding the UN resolutions
calling for member States to defend the Republic of Korea. Likewise, most
European countries, especially Germany, would almost certainly be spending
more on self-defence if the United States wasn't contributing substantially
to the defence of Europe. Meanwhile, Europe's vital energy supplies -
namely the oil fields of the Middle East - are protected from the jaws of
tyrants by, again, the United States. Still, even with all this going on,
terrorists plotting massive attacks on Western Civilization in the central
Himalayas were defeated by - yes, the United States. Finally, even now
the United States is pursuing terrorists in places like Bosnia-Herzegovina,
Somalia, and the Philippines.
Clearly, military power is called for now, more than even - and indeed, the
Europeans have benefited extraordinarily from the ability to be free riders
on US military power from the security of their energy supplies, to the
defence of their trading parters in NE Asia.
Moreover, even if Europe was somewhat reticent to be a military power,
there still could be a very valuable role for European miltaries. In the
last two major US military actions, in Kosovo and Afghanistan, a model has
begun to develop of the US conducting offensive military action to defeat
the hostiles with verbal and token practical support from the Europeans -
followed by the Europeans assuming the role of peacekeeping (an entirely
different set of skills than that needed by the US offensive forces.)
Unfortunately, even here the Europeans have proved inadequate to the task,
and have been left to call for the US to take away from its offensive
resources to devote peacekeepers to both Kosovo and Afghanistan.
Thus, we have a partnership that is falling apart. Despite being
ostensibly co-equal allies in NATO, the Europeans seem to have developed a
very parochial sense of security - only caring about the forcible defence
of human rights when it is occurring to fellow Europeans in their own
backyard, and almost taking a perverse joy in fulminating against the US
military, even while enjoying the benefits of its protection.
In other words, Europe needs to realize that the Trans-Atlantic partnership
is unequally yoked. As such, the Europeans ought to show a little bit of
deference in this partnership when it comes time to actually consider US
needs. A couple years ago, the US agreed to supply the "Thunder and
Lightning" of NATO operations in the Balkans, because the Europeans said
that it was in their interest. Now, the security of the US (and Europe
for that matter, even if they don't recognize it) is threatened by the
development of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - and it would be nice
if the Europeans could for once show a little bit of the same respect.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Our campaign against international terrorism does not represent some
sort of 'clash of civilizations.' Instead, it is a clash between
civilization and those who would destroy it." -Amb. Richard N. Haass
