Carnegie Europe is on the ground at the 2018 NATO summit in Brussels, offering readers exclusive access to the high-level discussions as they unfold.
**
For the first time in NATO's history, the president of the United States doesn’t just seem to disagree with the Europeans on substance—he actually appears be willing to walk away from the alliance. Judy Dempsey sat down with Tomas Valášek, director of Carnegie Europe and a former ambassador to NATO, to discuss Donald Trump’s businesslike approach to foreign policy and where the West fits into the U.S. president’s worldview.
Comments(2)
Valasek has an outdated version on war in the 21st Century, and even in general. Oceans meant little in protecting the native population in the colonial empire era; the Atlantic Ocean was the opposite, a waterway allowing the Spanish Empire to move silver mountains to Europe, with pirates sanctioned by the British crown stealing legally as much as possible, cherished European traditions. In our time the ocean is the perfect hiding place for submarines equipped with nuclear MIRV SLBM’s, or the perfect medium to deliver an autonomous nuclear torpedo, as illustrated in the end of the world weaponry in Putin’s recent presentation. Valasek states the obvious problem: the EU NATO members need the US conventional and nuclear arsenals. The EU, largest, wealthiest entity in Western history, can’t protect itself against a conventional attack from a country with one third the EU population and 20% GDP PP; every year their combined military budget, manifold larger than Russia’s widens the gap. Russia can conduct a large-scale offensive on a large front and sustain it long term. War is a continuation of politics with other means, so what exactly is Russia’s politics that would elicit this type of action? Minority treatment in the Baltic States, WWII monuments in Poland could, but it is next to impossible, although in Europe war is in the DNA. The solution is simple and obvious: the EU NATO members should be able to stop a Russian conventional offensive with their own conventional forces. That would include popular war, as designed by the Swiss, and successful for Vietnam and Afghanistan. Any variation employing nuclear weapons, including limited tactical use or threat of use should immediately elicit a similar response from the US, even if it will quickly escalate. There is the concern that an exercise like ZAPAD or an OAR variant will mask some kind of blitzkrieg. The best way to alleviate this concern is to introduce a 10-year moratorium on this type of exercises (a side bonus, a great contribution to delaying global warming). This is by no means a sign of weakness, as the nuclear weapons are minutes away of launch, but it might be a step in the right direction to defuse the escalating tension and avoid a war by accident. Cyberwarfare is of outmost concern and ideally a firewall similar with China’s should be deployed as soon as possible. It is probably too late, the next Sarajevo will be due to an incompetent system administrator, there are so many of them.
The NATO it's an military organization very important in order to maintain the principles and values of the democracy and liberty in the Occidental World. The NATO it's the bastion against the advanced of ideals of the new "Cesar of Russia" the he's the President of Russia Vladimir Putin. The International Community must be alert with him and his new ally Mr. Trump. Thanks.
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.