-
Restrain the Abusive Administative State
May 22, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Delivering Serbs to the Wolves
May 21, 2013 | 29 comments
-
The Perils of Intervention in Syria
May 7, 2013 | 37 comments
-
America on Welfare
April 25, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Thursday Is Tax Freedom Day
April 17, 2013 | 5 comments
At Large
Shrinking NATO
It’s becoming an alliance without a military.
(Page 3 of 3)
Not, of course, that they don’t have the money. They could make more cuts elsewhere, but their publics will not allow them to do so. Instead, he argued that the European states should work together more efficiently, ignoring sovereignty concerns. However, despite years of discussing a common foreign and defense policy backed by a pan-European military, virtually nothing has been achieved — other than adding an inconsequential EU “foreign minister” with more bureaucracy than power.
This won’t change while Americans allow the Europeans to free ride. As long as Uncle Sam is willing to play Uncle Sucker, the Europeans will be happy to play along. The only sensible response for Washington is to say no more. The U.S. government should defend America, not the rest of the world. Washington should cooperate with friendly states, including the Europeans, when shared interests are at stake. But no more unnecessary wars, like Libya. No more nation-building in Europe, like Kosovo.
After more than six decades, Europe should take responsibility for its own security, whatever happens in Syria. The Europeans should decide whether they feel threatened and respond accordingly, making whatever trade-offs prove necessary between economic revival and military security. And then Europe should live with the results. But that will happen only if Americans push their populous and prosperous friends off of America’s defense dole.
About the Author
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author and editor of several books, including The Politics of Plunder: Misgovernment in Washington (Transaction).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (20) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Doug Bandow
More Articles From At Large
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/12/06/shrinking-nato
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 12.6.12 @ 8:03AM
Lets get the hell out of NATO, Afganistan, The Middle East, Pakistan, Africa, Japan, Korea, Germany, Guam, etc. We could save at least one half trillion a year with getting rid of foreign aid and foreign entanglements. We have bankrupted the country in the last 20 years doing defense for people who can pay for it themselves in their own blood and treasure. Let the world defend itself.
mike 3/505| 12.6.12 @ 8:17AM
Very interesting article....But it ignores the 10-Ton, Pink elephant in the room...socialist/statist policies. Hidden almost to the last, a small blurb on although, "they could make more cuts elsewhere, but their publics will not allow them to do so." Sounds an awful lot like Medicaid, Food Stamps, Welfare here in the US. They may get a "decrease in the scheduled increase," but only defense ever actually gets cut.
A. C. Santore| 12.6.12 @ 9:51AM
Respectfully, Mike, the "10-Ton" elephant in the room is Russia.
Mr. Bandow's first mistake was to write "With the collapse of the Soviet Union and dissolution of the Warsaw Pact there was no longer the slightest chance that Moscow could dominate Europe, let alone Eurasia. The Europeans were capable of defending themselves against whatever dangers remained."
Then he says absolutely nothing about Russia's military, which is now in a major rebuilding phase. And with Putin rattling his sabres like has not been seen since the Cold War.
Putin can pretend all he wants to, but a dyed-in-the wool KGB big wig does not become a democratic stalwart overnight. Never, in fact.
The false sense of security was invented in Europe, and lives on unrelentingly there.
mike 3/505| 12.6.12 @ 10:09AM
AC,
I stand most firmly and correctly rebuked Sir! I turn over my King!
Regards,
Mike
mike 3/505| 12.6.12 @ 10:11AM
Actually, your comment about Putin was spot on. Think about it, taking NO other factors into consideration, If you had to hire a guy for the sole purpose of ensuring your country was safe from EXTERNAL threats, which guy would you hire, Obama or Putin?
Occam's Tool| 12.6.12 @ 12:00PM
A good point. However, within 10 years Russia will cease to be a military great power except for nukes---no men. Life expectancy of Russian male is 58 years, and no kids.
mike 3/505| 12.6.12 @ 12:04PM
True enough...But Putin is still a badass....Kinda makes me recall the side-by-side pictures of Netanyahu & Obama when they both were in their 20's. Google it...it's a stark difference. If you had to make the chioce back then and based on that pic, who would you choose to be your Commander In Chief (Nationality aside)?
Cobalt| 12.6.12 @ 5:36PM
Commander In Chief?
Obama couldn't manage a McDonalds franchise.
Meister| 12.6.12 @ 1:27PM
Russia = plenty of posturing but little of any real substance. They effectively have no choice but to rebuild as most of their kit is obsolete and will be more or less useless by the 2020s.
If you look at their plans for the Navy, for example, they are still very modest. A fleet with maybe a dozen SSNs and a similar number of destroyers split between the Atlantic and Pacific isn't exactly a candidate for global domination. Most of the new ships they are building (e.g. corvettes, patrol frigates) are more defensive than offensive. Maybe this will change, but given the economic and demographic challenges they face I can't see it.
mike 3/505| 12.6.12 @ 1:33PM
True....Bit one thing our adversaries used to say about us...America has awesome military capabilities, with no will to use them effectively.
Louis Jenkins| 12.6.12 @ 8:54AM
The American Military is stretched thin enough and the european nations keep cutting back. Soon enough, if not already, when Nato meets the only one with any muscle in the fight will be the US. They have grown soft, and yet the US is growing soft too. Thanks to OBama. Defense of the US is one of the few things granted by the Constitution, not welfare, food stamps, etc. Try to fight a war with an EBT card and see how far you get!
Meister| 12.6.12 @ 9:41AM
France is actually cutting defence spending by 7% in 2013 and 4% in both 2014 and 2015, so 15% over 3 years rather than 3% as stated here. Denmark decommissioned its 4 boat submarine squadron in 2004. It isn't going to happen, it already has. The UK has only itself to blame - the inefficient use of resources and trying to do much with too little (e.g. the regeneration of limited carrier strike) have resulted in the hollowing out of the British military to the point where entire capabilities are no longer viable.
Harry the Horrible| 12.6.12 @ 9:58AM
There are no threats in Europe, right?
Cancel out, pack up, and go home.
Also, that gets our troops out of the lines of fire when Europe erupts in war again over the EU and its policies, and we can decline to participate...
Doctor Right| 12.6.12 @ 10:28AM
Time to pull-up the stakes and come home from Europe.
If they don't want to defend themselves with an adequate force, why should we do it, instead?
And the next time the Germans get restless, or the Russians get paranoid, or the Muslims start attacking the southern border, it's their damn problem.
Occam's Tool| 12.6.12 @ 12:01PM
Doctor Right: you are correct. We cannot save them and they are unwilling to fight for themselves, unlike Israel. Further, as Euroweenies, they have no interest in fighting to protect freedom.
See Kratman's Caliphate.
Ronsch| 12.6.12 @ 12:47PM
NATO is like the club everyone wants to belong to, but really doe not accomplish much of anything. Or just like fluff on a resume (such as "community organizer") that fills in gaps but provides no solid substantive experience or skills.
Dean V| 12.6.12 @ 1:18PM
You could put the entire British army in the stands of Michigan Stadium in Ann Arbor–and still have room left for the Royal Marines
Dimitry_Aleksandrovich| 12.6.12 @ 4:13PM
The day NATO ceases to exist I will celebrate. I will never forget NATO bombs falling on my Serbian Orthodox brothers and sisters or that the Serbian Jerusalem known as Kosovo was stolen from them by NATO using KLA terrorists as their ground troops. NATO's actions in Bosnia and later Libya are no less criminal. Hands off of Syria!!!
RJ| 12.6.12 @ 9:47PM
Under the developing circumstances, it is hard to see the benefit for the US remaining in NATO and I doubt that Obama would be against US withdrawal from it.
Bilejones| 12.8.12 @ 11:26PM
"This won't change while Americans allow the Europeans to free ride. "
Free ride on what?
There are no material credible threats to Europe.
Providing political cover to US hegemonic violence threatens, not enhances European Security. Nato was always about US expansionism, not Euro security.
Bandow is one more Statist clown buried into the Koch's libertarian false flag organization.