Stratfor: Why the U.S. Will Struggle to Reduce Its Military Commitments Abroad
Highlights
* The United States has called on its allies to increase their support of various missions, particularly in the Middle East, in the hopes of refocusing resources on its competition with Russia and China.
* U.S. allies, however, have been largely unwilling or unable to commit more forces abroad. And those that have so far have offered only token additional support.
* The widespread mistrust that the bulk of its partners share regarding U.S. intentions against Iran has hampered the White House's ability to garner support for its security program in the Persian Gulf.
* In other places, like Syria, the United States will likely be able to cobble together some extra reinforcements, but nowhere sufficient enough to allow Washington to completely draw down its presence.
Time and again, the United States has attempted to redirect more of its attention and resources toward its competitions with Russia and China. But Washington's other commitments around the world continues to undermine this effort. Since taking office, U.S. President Donald Trump has sought to address this problem by pressuring allies to commit more military resources to places like Syria (where the United States is trying to draw troop levels) and most recently, the Persian Gulf (where it now faces an increased risk of a military clash with Iran).
Read more ....
WNU Editor: This reluctance to deploy military forces has been the case with America's allies for a long time. In the end the U.S. will have to make some hard decisions, starting with the realization that they cannot be everywhere at all times.
2 comments:
Seems to me this story is overwrought. The US has a small footprint in Syria to confound Iran but a much larger footprint in Iraq, Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait where the US isn’t asking for allies to replace US troops. As for the straits, the US has told allies the US won’t protect any shipping except our own unless the allies are actively convoying.
WNU the US will be able to close much with the private sector. Currently soldiers in the private sector are paid well. Ex soldiers who previously didn't earn much in the public sector. But they do it not just for mercenary reasons. They miss the combat and comradery. The private sector will not only help to bridge gaps in terms of budget, power and oversight - that's what much of Blackwater was all about, but importantly it blurs the decision making in ethical questions.
It used to be that nations gave you permission to kill, both legally and somewhat ethically, and you were trained and sworn to uphold publically accepted law. This is changing. Mercenary shadow wars in which the private sector gets to decide what goes is not unlike the problem we have with the private sector deciding what we are allowed to say on their platforms which they control with quasi monopoly. And lower than that are the social justice mobs that form online and bully you into submission, call you racist because they lose the argument and divide entire nations. All very problematic and symptomatic of our times
Post a Comment