Follow us on social

google cta
Us-military-scaled

Biden taps US reserves for NATO mission in Europe

This is what happens when the alliance promises Zelensky 300,000 response troops for the war.

Analysis | Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

The question over how "involved" the U.S. is in the Ukraine War is becoming increasingly rhetorical, as President Biden quietly signed an executive order on Thursday authorizing the call up of "the reserve and selected members of the individual ready reserve" for "the effective conduct of Operation Atlantic Resolve in and around the United States European Command’s area of responsibility."

The E.O. is brief and notes that no more than 3,000 reserves may be called up under the measure.

The question is, why? The military spin was on full display in Military.com yesterday: "This new designation benefits troops and families with increases in authorities, entitlements and access to the reserve component forces and personnel," said Lt. Gen. Douglas Sims, Joint Staff Director for Operations, who assured reporters the order would not result in higher U.S. troop levels in Europe.

The Pentagon's top spokesman Big. Gen. Pat Ryder put it more plainly: "It's unlocking additional forces for use in support of this operation."

After the invasion Washington increased its troop presence on the continent to 20,000. There were big headlines late last year when it was reported that members of the Army's 101st Airborne Division were "practicing for war with Russia just miles from the Ukraine border." We know from the Discord leaks there is a minimal number of U.S. Special Forces working with even more European military counterparts on the ground in Ukraine. There are at least 100 CIA officers on the ground there, too, according to reports, in non-combat roles.

A POLITICO article on yesterday's announcement gets right to the point: "the move suggests that the U.S. military’s training mission in Europe, along with the deployment of several new brigades after the invasion, has stretched active-duty forces."

Especially since NATO assured this week — as a consolation to Ukrainian President Zelensky, who wanted NATO member assurances — that the alliance would be upping its high readiness forces (ready to deploy in 30 days or less) to 300,000 strong. Right now the number of NATO troops on the continent is 100,000.

"It’s a tall order for the 31-member alliance whose individual members struggle with equipment and troop readiness after decades of skimping on military funding," said POLITICO writers Lara Seligman and Paul McLeary.

It's also a tall order for an American military that is struggling with the worst recruitment numbers in recent history. The Army experienced a shortfall of 25 percent in enlistments in the last fiscal year, and the other forces — Marines, Navy and Air Force — barely made their quotas. By all reports, it’s supposed to be worse this year.

Meanwhile, there are plenty of complaints that our European partners in "Operation Atlantic Resolve," are still not pulling their weight. As CATO's Justin Logan has charged many times, there is a dependency on the U.S. crutch and the war in Ukraine has more than encouraged that. At a time when it could be moving toward autonomy, Europe is hurtling faster into Uncle Sam's arms. From Logan:

It’s reasonable that our allies would like to use the U.S. economy and the U.S. military to their own ends. It’s unreasonable when American elites choose to indulge them. In multiple meetings with Biden administration officials after the war began, I was told that the United States would like Europe to do more for itself, but as one official put it, “we aren’t willing to put an ‘or else’ at the end of that sentence.”

Unfortunately, it now looks like Washington is stretching itself to accommodate, calling up reserves to meet a massive goal of 300,000 NATO troops on "high-readiness" ready to fight on the continent. Given the recruitment crisis and domestic needs at home, not to mention tensions with another great power in Asia, maybe it's time Biden take a moment to explain his strategy for ending this war, or short of that, asking directly for a greater commitment from the American people.

Update: Defense Priorities fellow and RS contributor Daniel Davis sent along these comments on the E.O.:

"If there's anything Russia has proven after 17 months of all-out warfare, is that the most they have been able to accomplish is to hang on to 17% of one neighboring state, 1/4th its size, which has no air force to speak of an no navy at all — and we believe we need to ramp up to a ground force of 300,000 "at a high state of readiness" to protect a 32 member alliance, with a population five times larger than Russia, an economy that dwarfs it, and an especially powerful and large air force and navy? I wholeheartedly agree with my colleague Raj Menon in today's New York Times: it's time for Europe to defend itself (based on reality of Western military and economic superiority, not on the fiction of a massive Russian conventional giant)."


(Bumble Dee/Shutterstock)
google cta
Analysis | Washington Politics
‘Water War’ rages as India-Pakistan tensions reach boiling point
Top image credit: A view of Ranjit Sagar Dam (Thein Dam), which is near the proposed site of the Shahpur Kandi Dam. (Shutterstock/mrinalpal)

A view of Ranjit Sagar Dam (Thein Dam), which is near the proposed site of the Shahpur Kandi Dam. (Shutterstock/mrinalpal)

‘Water War’ rages as India-Pakistan tensions reach boiling point

Global Crises

Last week, water became a focal point in the Iran war, as airstrikes hit desalination plants in Iran and Bahrain. Further east, a slower motion water war was playing out — one that is heightening tensions between two nuclear armed powers.

The Shahpur Kandi Dam project was first conceptualized in the late 1970s. In 1982, former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi laid its foundation stone and set a 1988 deadline for the project. But inter-state conflicts between Punjab, Jammu, and Kashmir stalled construction for decades.

keep readingShow less
Not so diplomatic: Witkoff, Kushner, and Trump’s march to war in Iran
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner and U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff attend the inaugural Board of Peace meeting at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C., U.S., February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Not so diplomatic: Witkoff, Kushner, and Trump’s march to war in Iran

Middle East

Steve Witkoff, the special envoy to the Middle East who President Donald Trump tasked with negotiating a deal with Iran, does not sound very much like a diplomat lately.

“There’s almost no stopping them, they have an endless supply of [enriched uranium],” Witkoff told Sean Hannity the day the war began. “They thought they could strong-arm us. ... It was very, very clear that it was — it was going to be impossible, probably by the second meeting.”

keep readingShow less
Pete Hegseth
Top Image Credit: Defense Sec. Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine hold briefing on the U.S. - Iran war 3/13/2026 CNBC Television [YouTube/Screenshot]

=

Hegseth lauds Iran campaign but ignores shrinking US stockpiles

QiOSK

At a Pentagon press conference Friday morning, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth cheered about how U.S. operations against Iran have blunted Tehran’s munitions capacities and ability to fight.

“Iran has no air defenses. Iran has no air force. Iran has no navy. Their missiles, their missile launchers and drones are being destroyed or shot out of the sky,” Hegseth said, telling reporters the United States and Israel have struck over 15,000 targets in Iran. “Their missile volume is down 90%. Their one-way attack drones yesterday [were] down 95%.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.