In what should be no surprise, tensions remain high between Russia and Europe after the annexation of Crimea in February 2014. Neighboring NATO nations continue to fear about Russian intentions as aggression pops around the region. Russian officials have recently defended their right to deploy nuclear weapons in Crimea and military operations continue along the borders of several European states. Further, there have been a reported 1,000 violations of the shaky ceasefire agreement currently in place in Ukraine and more Russian military personnel continue to flood the region.

Reaction to this wave of Russian aggression has fallen primarily on the United States. As NATO training exercises in Eastern Europe to deter further Russian actions become a daily ritual, it is imperative to remember that the U.S. finances over 75% of NATO expenditures. In spite of forceful rhetoric from European leaders, such as British Prime Minister David Cameron likening Russian aggression to the trampling of Belgium and Poland before WW2, there has been a reluctance to beef up defense spending.

History and the study of international relations teach a policy of deterrence by which peace can be maintained through altering the cost-benefit analysis of aggression. This policy makes aggression so costly that the potential benefits of aggression are no longer worth the cost or risk, and is perhaps best known for its execution during the Cold War with the policy of mutually assured destruction. By this thought, a major reason why Russia was able to annex Crimea and to maintain a strong military presence in Eastern Ukraine is that resistance was negligible. In line with this thinking, NATO training exercises in Eastern Europe are becoming practically a daily ritual. While these exercises reflect the right idea, the lack of European support and recent uncertainty about American commitment threaten the security of all of Europe.

Although NATO is widely used to reinforce the idea of European strength, it is imperative to remember that the United States funds over 75% of NATO expenditures. And despite the forceful rhetoric of European leaders on the outrage of Russian actions, the funding discrepancy is getting worse. In 2015, NATO nations pledged to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense per year. Yet, as of today, only tiny Estonia plans to meet the 2015 commitment. In comparison, the United States and Russia both spend roughly 4% of their GDP on defense spending. In fact, even after officially committing to higher defense spending, Bulgaria, Canada, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and the United Kingdom are actually cutting their defense spending.

In a time of increasing chaos and dreadfully low European defense spending, these actions endanger the security of their citizens and invite Russian aggression. The United States remains the only military might that can provide even a degree of security to Eastern Europe. Imagine the recalculations in Russian strategy given the absence of American support, especially in light of a recent revelation that German soldiers painted brooms black to pass them off as machine guns in a recent NATO training exercise. This example only reinforces the negligence of European states towards their militaries, and is made even worse given the intentions of six European nations, including Germany, to actually cut their defense spending in the upcoming year. Without a greater emphasis on defense spending, they are practically encouraging Russia to do as it wishes.

Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, has joined a number of American officials in commenting on the surprisingly lackadaisical approach to defense spending in Europe and called the intended defense spending cuts as “dangerous.” Further, Henry Kissinger has remarked that “because the vast majority of NATO government has subordinated defense expenditure to domestic programs, they haven’t had the capacity to develop meaningful strategy to deal with a major attack.” The misplaced focus of European states disproportionally places their security in the hands of the United States and threatens to undermine the system of deterrence that has relatively maintained peace in Europe since World War II.

This issue could not be more relevant in today’s world. Despite the reliance of Europe on the United States for its defense and the high tensions between Russia and the West, the United States has shown a surprising and disappointing reluctance to use the tools at its disposal to deter aggression and preserve peace. Despite calls from all sides, President Obama has continually refused to arm Ukraine and continues to place faith in a ceasefire that has been violated over 1,000 times. Now, while these actions question the decision making and understanding of the current administration, they also suggest that for now, the United States can’t be trusted to ensure European security. European states need to step up their defense spending to send a clear message to Russia that their actions are being taken seriously and that further aggression will not be tolerated under any circumstances. It’s time for Europe to begin taking responsibility for its national security in order to preserve world peace.

Sources:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31830197

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/opinion/editorials/2015/03/04/editorial-roundup-europes-cuts-defense-inexcusable/24400727/

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-02-26/europe-isn-t-really-worried-about-putin

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/11/us-russia-crimea-nuclear-idUSKBN0M710N20150311?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/us/politics/obama-said-to-resist-growing-pressure-from-all-sides-to-arm-ukraine.html?ref=politics&_r=0