[ad_1]
American representatives are joined by European partners in three security conferences in Brussels and Munich this week, keenly aware of the patterns of American history that have vacillated between engagement and isolationism.
After World War II, the creation and leadership of the transatlantic NATO alliance represented a clear American vision for global engagement. But the United States also resists involvement in dealing with crises abroad and periodically turns inward.
Why I wrote this
The United States has historically debated whether to play a major role on the world stage or turn inward. The current fighting could have serious security implications for Ukraine and other European countries as “America First” gains momentum.
Many observers fear that the country is now retreating into what the late Henry Kissinger once called “sullen isolationism.”
There are two reasons why any American isolationism worries European allies, despite President Joe Biden’s vows that the United States stands by its allies.
The first is that Europeans are almost viscerally reminded of America’s most dramatic recent retreat into isolationism. It began in the years after World War I, when Washington largely sat on the sidelines as Adolf Hitler’s Germany rearmed, then threatened, and eventually invaded neighboring countries.
The second was Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, sparking the largest armed conflict in Europe since the end of World War II.
President Joe Biden reacted strongly when President Donald Trump recently suggested that if he returned to the White House, he would encourage Russia to attack financially “delinquent” US allies in Europe. . “That’s un-American!” he fumed.
But is this really the case?
That’s the question plaguing Washington’s European partners, who will join American representatives at three security conferences in Brussels and Munich this week.
Why I wrote this
The United States has historically debated whether to play a major role on the world stage or turn inward. The current fighting could have serious security implications for Ukraine and other European countries as “America First” gains momentum.
Reason: They recognize that the United States’ founding and leadership of NATO after World War II represented one of the clearest American visions for engagement with the world. In other periods of history, the United States has turned inward, resisting involvement in meeting challenges and responding to crises abroad.
Reflecting Trump’s “America First” mantra, the country has retreated into what the late Henry Kissinger once called “sullen isolationism.”
The prospect of it happening again worries European allies for two reasons.
The first is that Europeans are almost viscerally reminded of America’s most dramatic recent retreat into isolationism. It began in the years after World War I, when Washington largely sat on the sidelines as Adolf Hitler’s Germany rearmed, then threatened, and eventually invaded neighboring countries.
The second was Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, sparking the largest armed conflict in Europe since the end of World War II.
Virginia Mayo/Associated Press
Biden’s response to Trump’s remarks reaffirming America’s “sacred commitment” to the transatlantic defense alliance will reassure European nations attending security talks with their American counterparts this week.
But their concerns inevitably colored the first two of those meetings on Wednesday.
When NATO defense ministers convened in Brussels, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told reporters that the alliance would “ensure that Moscow leaves no room for miscalculation regarding our readiness and determination to defend all allies.” “I will continue to do so,” he said with great difficulty.
The second meeting in Brussels included the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, a partnership of more than 50 countries brought together by the United States to help provide arms to Kiev after Mr. Putin’s invasion. U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, clearly aware of allies’ doubts and concerns, avoided mentioning domestic opposition to Washington’s latest funding measures. He insisted that the United States remains committed to assisting Kiev because it is the right thing to do and matters to “the core of our national security.”
On Friday, European, U.S. and other political and defense officials will gather to kick off the annual Munich Security Conference.
When these gatherings took place a year ago, there was a clear sense of confidence and common purpose. The idea was to help Ukraine defeat the invasion and ultimately push Putin’s forces back into Russia. At last year’s Munich conference, China’s foreign minister urged European countries to distance themselves from what he described as the U.S. objective of supplying arms to Ukraine and prolonging the war, but he faced stiff opposition.
There remains a sense of shared commitment between the United States and Europe. But a rearming Russia may soon be in a position to launch its own advance after the failure of an offensive in Ukraine that significantly set back Putin’s forces.
Ukraine is still waiting for promised tanks, air defense batteries and fighter jets. We’re running out of shells.
And the U.S. funding package for Ukraine has stalled in Congress for months as Mr. Trump urges his supporters to vote against it. The Senate approved it this week as some Republicans rebelled against the former president. But it must pass the Republican-controlled House.
The irony is that Europeans now play an increasingly important role, given Mr. Trump’s portrayal of European members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as freeloaders.
Even before the invasion, member states had continued to make progress toward meeting their 2006 goal of spending at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense, a move that no doubt led to then-President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the United States. The fact that he was making implicit threats was also a contributing factor. Commitment to NATO.
However, it is only recently that defense spending has increased significantly. President Putin was the catalyst for this.
His war in Ukraine made defense a vital priority for European countries, especially those that fled Moscow’s orbit with the collapse of the Soviet Union, such as Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Poland.
Joanna Geron/Reuters
Russia’s neighbors Sweden and Finland, which had long relied on neutrality as a coexistence strategy with Moscow, opted to join NATO in response to the invasion.
All of Europe seems convinced that if Mr. Putin achieves a military victory in Ukraine, it is only a matter of time before he threatens and even uses force against other countries.
Earlier this month, the 27-nation European Union approved its own $54 billion aid package for Ukraine. Although the EU is an economic bloc, the war prompted the EU to take steps to strengthen defense issues, particularly the production of arms and ammunition.
The likely short-term effect of Mr. Trump’s NATO comments is to strengthen calls within Europe to accelerate such efforts and, more generally, to argue that even if the United States Even if we conclude that victory is not necessary, Europe will likely be able to put in place a system that can restrain Russia. .
Still, concerns about a major retreat from U.S. involvement in Europe, similar to what happened after World War I, go beyond the difficulty European countries will have in assembling a credible defense against Mr. Putin on their own.
It is the loss of NATO’s primary function since its creation 75 years ago: to act as a deterrent by signaling that an attack on a member state is an attack on all nations, including the United States.
President Biden reiterated that core provision this week. “If President Putin attacks, the United States will defend every inch of NATO territory,” he said.
But he also included a qualifier that may not be all that comforting.
“As long as I’m president…”
[ad_2]
Source link
