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 4 | Version 5 |
|---|---|
| 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 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 on 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 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. 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.” | 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.” |
| 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 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 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 say 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. | American officials say 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 borders between Russia and new members of NATO. | 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 between Russia and new members of NATO. |
| 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 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 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 permanent deployment of NATO troops in the region a major foreign policy goal. |
| “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.” | “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.” |
| This summer’s NATO summit meeting will be held in Warsaw, and the proposal anticipates some of the demands likely to be raised. | This summer’s NATO summit meeting will be held in Warsaw, and the proposal anticipates some of the demands likely to be raised. |
| “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.” |
| Radko Hokovsky, executive director of European Values, a research organization in Prague, 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. | Radko Hokovsky, executive director of European Values, a research organization in Prague, 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. |
| “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.” | “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. | 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. |
| “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 Micheal McNamara, a NATO specialist at the University of Tartu in Estonia. “Instead, this $3.4 billion can be seen as an important down-payment on the new-style U.S. deterrence posture in Eastern Europe, emphasizing constant rotation of military units and prepositioning of equipment.” | “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 Micheal McNamara, a NATO specialist at the University of Tartu in Estonia. “Instead, this $3.4 billion can be seen as an important down-payment on the new-style U.S. deterrence posture in Eastern Europe, emphasizing constant rotation of military units and prepositioning of equipment.” |
| 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. | 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. | “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. | 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.” | “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.” | 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. | 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. |
| “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.” |