Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NATO, Europe and the US
Hero von Esens ^ | March 11th 2005 | Hero von Esens

Posted on 03/11/2005 9:33:42 AM PST by Licinia Stuart

March 11, 2005

EU Shock: Troops May Have to Fight

NATO's Secretary General, Dutchman Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, seems to know a thing or two about expectation management.

Talking to El Pais yesterday, he sought to remind European leaders that soldiers, to be effective, may sometimes be called on to fight.

"Why is the EU creating battle groups?" he asks rhetorically. "It is not just to help rebuild a country. It may be, that to keep the peace, combat is necessary."

He also pours some cold water on the distinction, much vaunted within the EU, between the "hard power" (military) of the US and NATO, and the "soft power" (essentially diplomacy) championed by the EU (as in the attempt to deal with Iran´s nuclear ambitions by the so-called "EU 3" - France, Germany and Britain).

A nicely-judged intervention from the NATO chief. It makes explicit what some of the more pacifist EU participants, such as Germany and Sweden, may prefer not to have spelled out too clearly, but which needs to be spelled out now if tears are to be avoided later. One of the things which most hamstrung UN troops at Srebrenica, to take just one example, was the injunction that as mere "peacekeepers" they were not allowed to intervene with armed force even when that was transparently required. NATO wants to avoid being sucked into that kind of inactive turpitude. De Hoop Scheffer is trying to clear such nagging issues out of the way - before soldiers are formed into units. When soldiers are asked to do the work of diplomats and diplomats the work of soldiers, as seems to be the wish in certain European capitals, it raises expectations which can only be dashed. Good that NATO sees it this way, and even better that the EU will be made to see it too.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; History; Hobbies; Military/Veterans; Miscellaneous; Politics; Reference
KEYWORDS: hardandsoftpower; iran; militaryaction; nato
Looks like some of the Euroleaders are in for a big shock..

Some of those countries probably don´t even have any soldiers prepared to fight!

But a good wake-up call for them, all the same. And, if it works out, a better deal for the US taxpayer too...

1 posted on 03/11/2005 9:33:43 AM PST by Licinia Stuart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Licinia Stuart

Does this mean installing firing pins in the rifles?


2 posted on 03/11/2005 9:44:45 AM PST by SWAMPSNIPER ( suspect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Licinia Stuart
Some of those countries probably don´t even have any soldiers prepared to fight!

Actually its estimated by the Pentagon that of the 2.1 million troops of the EU member states could be termed combat ready. BUt that doesn't tell the whole story. Less than 3% of their forces can be projected beyond their border. In short most of the Eureopeans wearing uniforms are little more than national police with some heavy weapons (that they by and large do not have ammunition for).

European "soft power" is a myth created by EU leaders to avoid military spending since they have created a welfare culture that requires vast resources each year to support. Call it "soft power" if you will but sounds more like wishful thinking.

3 posted on 03/11/2005 11:02:43 AM PST by An Old Marine (Freedom isn't Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: An Old Marine

Think you´re right - "soft power" is diplomacy backed up by more diplomacy but not by military power. If it works, great, of course, but without a threat of force in the background it isn´t very persuasive.

As to NATO, if the new chief can get some of the European countries to see that the option of military force is essential if the new Eurosquads are going to mean anything, and they then act on it and free up some troops able to go on active service outside their own countries, that would be a pretty strong result. Whether that´s really in US interests is another question - financially, it´d be good to have other nations doing something to help US forces out more; but I can imagine the White house not being comfortable with an alternative centre of military power, especially when controlled by Europeans in the shape of the EU..


4 posted on 03/11/2005 11:15:55 AM PST by Licinia Stuart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Licinia Stuart
alternative centre of military power, especially when controlled by Europeans in the shape of the EU

The reality is that EU forces have very little offensive power. Their militaries are constructed for internal defense and interestingly largely for defense with civil issues. Said another way EU military power is there to use against their own people.

\ Further they have no logistical tail. Even the forces deployed "overseas" are utterly dependent on the US for their logistical and transportation needs. In short European militaries need the US to provide their beans and bullets. They are otherwise helpless.

5 posted on 03/11/2005 12:59:23 PM PST by An Old Marine (Freedom isn't Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson