This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/03/world/europe/eastern-europe-us-military.html
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Eastern Europe Cautiously Welcomes Larger U.S. Military Presence | Eastern Europe Cautiously Welcomes Larger U.S. Military Presence |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| 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, was greeted warmly but warily in the region on Tuesday. | 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, was greeted warmly but warily in the region on Tuesday. |
| “It is not only the right decision, it is necessary to protect Central Europe from Putin’s expansionistic lust,” said Radko Hokovsky, executive director of European Values, a research organization in Prague. | “It is not only the right decision, it is necessary to protect Central Europe from Putin’s expansionistic lust,” said Radko Hokovsky, executive director of European Values, a research organization in Prague. |
| 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 large-scale military maneuvers near its western borders — have unsettled many of the former Communist states in the region and have led to increasing demands for a concrete Western response. | 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 large-scale military maneuvers near its western borders — have unsettled many of the former Communist states in the region and have led to increasing demands for a concrete Western response. |
| There was little immediate reaction from government officials in the region — or in Russia — to the news from Washington, with press officers in the Baltics, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and elsewhere saying that their governments needed time to review the details of the proposal before providing a response. | There was little immediate reaction from government officials in the region — or in Russia — to the news from Washington, with press officers in the Baltics, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and elsewhere saying that their governments needed time to review the details of the proposal before providing a response. |
| The news was expected to draw a harsh reaction from the Kremlin and to prompt Mr. Putin to respond with a buildup of his own, although analysts doubted that it would inspire a new arms race. | The news was expected to draw a harsh reaction from the Kremlin and to prompt Mr. Putin to respond with a buildup of his own, although analysts 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.” | “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.” | Still, Mr. Korotchenko added, “the response will not be hysteric.” |
| Some action along these lines had been expected since Western officials announced at a NATO summit meeting in Wales last summer plans to build military supply bases and to station troops in Eastern Europe the region to bolster its ability to respond rapidly in the event of Russian aggression. | Some action along these lines had been expected since Western officials announced at a NATO summit meeting in Wales last summer plans to build military supply bases and to station troops in Eastern Europe the region to bolster its ability to respond rapidly in the event of Russian aggression. |
| That the Obama administration was proposing more than $3.4 billion in military spending in the region next year — far above the $786 million in the current budget — put some heft behind what had been a vague goal, but questions about where the equipment and troops would be stationed were left unanswered. | That the Obama administration was proposing more than $3.4 billion in military spending in the region next year — far above the $786 million in the current budget — put some heft behind what had been a vague goal, but questions about where the equipment and troops would be stationed were left unanswered. |
| American officials told The New York Times that the intention was to position new equipment — available to both United States and NATO forces —in the region as well as to 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 their borders. | 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 their borders. |
| Government leaders in Poland and the Baltic nations have argued that Russia’s aggressive actions in Ukraine 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 permanent deployment of NATO troops in the region a major foreign policy goal. | Government leaders in Poland and the Baltic nations have argued that Russia’s aggressive actions in Ukraine 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 permanent 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 proposal provides some response to demands that might have dominated the talks. | This summer’s NATO summit meeting will be held in Warsaw, and the proposal provides some response to demands that might have dominated the talks. |
| “It’s important for our self-confidence to see that the United States finally takes European security seriously again,” said Petr Kolar, a former Czech ambassador to the United States and to Russia. “At the same, time I wish that the European allies would do their homework, as well. It’s not fair to expect the U.S. to save us all the time, when we don’t take our protection seriously enough.” | “It’s important for our self-confidence to see that the United States finally takes European security seriously again,” said Petr Kolar, a former Czech ambassador to the United States and to Russia. “At the same, time I wish that the European allies would do their homework, as well. It’s not fair to expect the U.S. to save us all the time, when we don’t take our protection seriously enough.” |
| Mr. Hokovsky, the European Values director, agreed. “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. | Mr. Hokovsky, the European Values director, agreed. “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, overall European military spending has been dropping. Although NATO asks its member states to contribute 2 percent of gross domestic product to military purposes, only a few countries in Europe do. According to the NATO 2015 Annual Report, the European part of the alliance devoted to military spending 1.51 percent of G.D.P. in 2013, 1.47 percent in 2014 and 1.43 percent last year. | Despite Russian aggression, overall European military spending has been dropping. Although NATO asks its member states to contribute 2 percent of gross domestic product to military purposes, only a few countries in Europe do. According to the NATO 2015 Annual Report, the European part of the alliance devoted to military spending 1.51 percent of G.D.P. in 2013, 1.47 percent in 2014 and 1.43 percent last year. |
| Obama administration officials said that the American proposal was largely a reaction to recent aggression by Mr. Putin, but they also cited other goals, including providing forces capable of fighting potential threats from Islamic extremists and reacting to the influx of migrants from Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere. | |
| “Both politicians and regular people are very likely to support any enhancements to Romania’s security landscape,” said Radu Magdin, a political analyst in Bucharest, Romania. “Russia is still strongly perceived as a threat and bolder U.S. moves and capabilities would be most welcomed. Let us not forget that Romania is also pushing diplomatically for a permanent NATO fleet on the Black Sea in order to increase regional security.” | |
| Poland, Romania and the Baltics have been especially vocal in criticizing Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its continuing support of separatists in eastern Ukraine. Poland, in particular, has made numerous international appeals, both under the new government and the previous, center-right one, for NATO troops to be stationed in the region. | |
| “It’s a very significant increase, which needs to be viewed as a positive step,” said Marian Majer, director of the Slovak Security Policy Institute in Bratislava. | “It’s a very significant increase, which needs to be viewed as a positive step,” said Marian Majer, director of the Slovak Security Policy Institute in Bratislava. |
| The buildup did not come as a surprise, Mr. Majer said, as it has been a topic of discussion in security circles in the region for months. But the size of the increase and the context, coming during an American election campaign, will bolster confidence that the United States is eager to demonstrate its commitment to the region’s security. | |
| 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 madeovertures 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 fringe, including the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland and not contiguous with the rest of Russia. | |
| “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.” | |
| He also predicted that Mr. Putin would opt to deploy Russia’s Iskander-M short-range ballistic missile system as well as the S-400 antiaircraft system, “not to mention tactical nuclear weapons.” | |
| Mr. Korotchenko agreed that these systems would most likely 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 already hobbling the Russian conomy. | |
| “Russia will not participate in the arms race,” Mr. Korotchenko said. “Nobody will do anything excessive. Any reaction will be based on the fact that Russia has tactical nuclear weapons.” | “Russia will not participate in the arms race,” Mr. Korotchenko said. “Nobody will do anything excessive. Any reaction will be based on the fact that Russia has tactical nuclear weapons.” |
| If necessary, funds will be diverted from other areas, he said. | |
| “We remember well how the arms race ended for the Soviet Union,” Mr. Korotchenko said. “We will not make the same mistake twice.” | “We remember well how the arms race ended for the Soviet Union,” Mr. Korotchenko said. “We will not make the same mistake twice.” |