Recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin said “We
will choke them all. What are you afraid
of?” during a RIA Novosti interview when questioned about the expansion of NATO
into Eastern Europe.
Choke is an
interesting verb in this case because it highlights the need for a reassessment
of basing and troop levels in EUCOM and the role of strategic ground power in
the European theater. To choke requires
the use of hands, or possibly feet and legs if you have a black belt in Judo –
like President Putin. Ground power does
what air and sea power have been unable to do, and that is the ability to
contain by providing a physical barrier through existence instead of a threat
of violence. Air and sea power require a
decision on the part of the coercer to follow through with their threat of
violent reprisal. Ground power, on the
other hand, leaves no question of violent action because to violate the
boundaries established by ground power requires physically moving the deterring
force off the piece of land it occupies.
The United States should vigorously pursue new basing opportunities in
Eastern Europe to strengthen NATO resolve against Russian territorial expansionism
in the former Soviet sphere.
Since the beginning of February, 2014, NATO has
maintained a naval force in the Black, Aegean, and Baltic Seas. Initially the Black Sea forces were stationed
to provide additional security for the Winter Olympics at Sochi, and since then
have conducted a series of naval war game exercises. The presence of missile destroyers and
frigates did not halt Russian aggression.
Similarly, several wings of NATO aircraft have been forward deployed to
former Warsaw Pact countries. These
aircraft have conducted combat air patrols over the Baltic States, along with
AWACS missions over Polish and Romanian airspace to monitor the situation as it
develops in the east. In response the Russian
air forces have brazenly defied allied posturing by buzzing US warships, and
even going so far as to fly two TU-95 Bears over Dutch airspace. Though it is not uncommon for Russian
aircraft to occasionally enter NATO member countries’ airspace, during such
heightened tensions it seems rather suspect.
With the crisis in
Ukraine continuing to unravel, many in the West are worried of further Russian
backed aggression against the governments of other former Soviet states in
Eastern Europe, especially in the weaker Baltic States. Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia all have
sizable ethnic Russian populations. The
Russian delegation to the UN Human Rights Commission expressed concern in March
that ethnic Russians were being persecuted.
This type of rhetoric when viewed in light of Russian actions in Crimea
and Ukraine should be taken with serious concern. Fortunately for the Baltic States and Poland,
their membership in NATO provides them with a security umbrella Ukraine was
never afforded. NATO’s Secretary-General
Anders Rasmussen pledged to step air patrols and boost its military presence
along the alliance’s eastern border in Europe, citing Russia’s alleged involvement
in the Ukrainian crisis.
The United States has
taken the lead in deploying ground forces in the Eastern European theater by
sending several airborne infantry units and some special operations forces
there as well to conduct joint training exercises with the Polish, Latvian,
Lithuanian and Estonian armed forces. Some 600 soldiers from the 173rd are
deployed to the region train NATO forces, along with approximately 140 special
operations forces from the 10th Special Forces Group according to
the Pentagon. While these troops are
expected to be rotated out and replaced throughout the year, a more permanent
solution to the problem of Russian aggression would be to base American troops
in the Baltic, Polish, and possibly Romanian territories. These decisions would of course be incumbent
upon a desire on the part of host nations, and for now it the best course of
action is to continue and increase the number and level of military training
exercises in the NATO member states of Eastern Europe. When asked if sending the airborne troops
were simply symbolic, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby
said “Any time you put troops on the ground and doing exercises, in this case
for a month at a time, it’s more than symbology,” he said. “The kind of work
that we’re going to be doing is real infantry training. And that’s not
insignificant.”
No comments:
Post a Comment