Posted on 02/15/2017 5:50:10 PM PST by nickcarraway
The election of Donald Trump to President of the US has awoken fears that the US will no longer be the guardian of European security. If Washington steps back, can Berlin fill the void? After less than a month of life with the Trump administration, it is still far from clear how Washington now sees NATO and the defence of Europe.
On Tuesday US Defence Secretary James Mattis described NATO as "the most successful military alliance in history" on his way to a meeting of defence ministers in Brussels.
But his boss in the White House has repeatedly called the alliance's continued utility into question and has called on other member states to do more.
On the campaign trail before his election Trump said that if Russia attacked the Baltic states, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing if those nations have “fulfilled their obligations to us.”
As the largest economy in Europe, and the powerbroker in the EU, Germany is the obvious NATO partner to step into the breach, should the US draw back.
In late January and early February, hundreds of German soldiers landed in Lithuania to head up a deployment of a 1,200-strong battalion that will include forces from several NATO members.
Germany's Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen, who was at the base to welcome the troops, said that "it sends a clear and important message to all: NATO stands strong and united."
It was one of several headlines over recent months that suggest Berlin is taking its military commitments more seriously.
In May 2016, the Defence Ministry announced that it was adding thousands of new soldiers to its ranks and increasing its spending by billions. It was the second year in a row that an increase in defence spending was announced, after continual cuts since the end of the Cold War.
"It is clear to Germany that we need to contribute more to the NATO alliance," a spokesman for the Defence Ministry told The Local on Tuesday.
But he also stressed the contribution the Bundeswehr (German military) is already making to European security.
As well as the troop commitment in Lithuania, Germany is a key contributor to the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) - a highly mobile force of 5,000 soldiers set up to deter a Russian assault on smaller NATO members.
The German airforce has also been involved in policing air space over the Baltic region, while contributing "significantly" to Multinational Corps Northeast (a military cooperation with Poland and Denmark), the spokesman added.
He warned though that for Germany to meet its NATO obligations, the government needs to continually increase military spending year-on-year until 2030. Anything less will mean that the country will spend less than the current 1.2 percent of GDP on defence, already significantly below the 2 percent commitment made by NATO members in 2014.
But a defence expert The Local spoke to expressed deep scepticism about Germany's ability to forge a defence policy which would ensure European security.
Describing the country's leadership as "nuclear illiterates", Dr. Gustav Gressel, a defence expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), argued "nuclear deterrence is one of the main contributions the US has given to Europe".
"This gap must be filled if the US does indeed withdraw," Gressel continued.
"How can that happen in a country [Germany] in which nuclear deterrence has been a taboo topic for 25 years and in which the desire for complete nuclear disarmament is considered realistic policy?"
Gressel stressed that public antipathy to assertive defence policies was tying policy makers' hands.
"The reunification of Germany was the last big goal for Germans. After that everyone fell into this 'end of history' feeling - everything is good, we're all friends and it has to stay that way. Since then it has been hard to mobilize Germans for new projects."
Any time European policies have rubbed up against Russian resistance, the German public have rebelled against efforts to push them through.
"The overwhelming majority of the electorate simply don't want to be drawn into a confrontation which it can't understand and the repercussions of which it can't predict."
But he also said that politicians were doing to little to re-frame the debate.
"Germany hasn't managed to turn its historical guilt into a consciousness for its historical responsibility," he said.
“That the Russian regime is intentionally making ideological constructs of the 1930s its own, that it considers the Hitler-Stalin pact to be 'normal politics', and that putting insubordinate Ukrainians in concentration camps is discussed on public television, is only discussed by a small group of German politicians - and they are accused of being 'warmongers'."
Not on a 40 hr workweek.
The German armed forces wouldn’t last a week in a one-on-one fight with Russia.
Looks like the Volkssturm in 1945.
And just about as well equipped.
I think at one time last year the Germans had all of two combat helicopters operating: no maintenance.
No.
But the good news is, the French can wait for the Russians to reach the Rhine, then nuke Germany.
Based on past performance, I’m going to say ... “no”.
Germany sunk its tax revenue into welfare and recently into islamist takeover. They will be attacked from the outside and the inside and they have cut their defense to the bone. I do not think we should sacrifice to defend them. After islam takes over we should just nuke them.
In modern warfare, good strategy, good tactics, knowing when to call and when to walkaway are the most important assets.
It is possible that someone in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia has the best skills and can bring together the former East bloc states. It is possible that both Merkel types and Gilder types dont really know how to motivate a critical mass to have the will to unite against the enemy.
And who is the enemy? ISIS? Or Putin who is anti-ISIS? or ???
The defeated Wermacht of 1945 looked more capable than this bunch.
Who cares. The Poles will kill anything that moves.
Obviously not, the muslims just invaded and no one lifted a finger to stop them.
How do you protect people bent on committing suicide..?
That sounds VERY dangerous.
Er....No.
The modern German Army isn’t capable of defending Germany, much less Europe. Even as well trained as they are, 60,000 active duty soldiers only go so far.
Here is a chart from Wikipedia showing its 2016 order of battle:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Army#/media/File:Germany_Army_2012.png
Here is the article the chart is taken from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Army
1200 German troops for Lithuania? What is German for speedbump? Wait, too late. What was Russian for very small speedbump?
Not likely. This is strike three and there won’t be a Germany or a German race much longer.
Remember the histories are written by the winners, none of which acknowledge that Stalin was ready to move west at the same time Hitler moved east. Damn shame all the German soldiers that died keeping the communists out of their land just to give it to the muslims two generations later.
The photo is labeled-—
Bundeswehr soldiers in Lithuania. Photo: DPA
There seem to be a mix of ages in the photo, altho all wearing the Flecktarn uniform, and look more like reservists. At least give them credit for trying. Does Germany allow or expect the Muslim immigrants to serve?
Germany defending Europe?
I guess they think this is a best of five series. The rest of the world th out it was two out of three.
Not long ago, it was reported that German elements of the NATO QRF—the tip of the alliance spear—were training with broomsticks, because the unit didn’t have enough weapons and ammo for all of its troops. And remember, along with the U.S. and UK, the German military is considered the best in NATO.
Putin is laughing.
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.
