Follow us on social

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

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)
Analysis | Washington Politics
The Ukraine War at two years: By the numbers


KYIV, UKRAINE - July 12, 2023: Destroyed and burned Russian military tanks and parts of equipment are exhibited at the Mykhailivska square in Kyiv city centre. (Oleksandr Popenko/Shutterstock)

The Ukraine War at two years: By the numbers

Europe

Two years ago on Feb. 24, 2022, the world watched as Russian tanks rolled into the outskirts of Kyiv and missiles struck the capital city.

Contrary to initial predictions, Kyiv never fell, but the country today remains embroiled in conflict. The front line holds in the southeastern region of the country, with contested areas largely focused on the Russian-speaking Donbas and port cities around the Black Sea.

keep readingShow less
Navalny's death shouldn't close off talks with Putin

A woman lays flowers at the monument to the victims of political repressions following the death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, in Moscow, Russia February 16, 2024. REUTERS/Stringer

Navalny's death shouldn't close off talks with Putin

Analysis

President Biden was entirely correct in the first part of his judgment on the death of Alexei Navalny: “Putin is responsible, whether he ordered it, or he is responsible for the circumstances he put that man in.” Even if Navalny eventually died of “natural causes,” his previous poisoning, and the circumstances of his imprisonment, must obviously be considered as critical factors in his death.

For his tremendous courage in returning to Russia after his medical treatment in the West — knowing well the dangers that he faced — the memory of Navalny should be held in great honor. He joins the immense list of Russians who have died for their beliefs at the hands of the state. Public expressions of anger and disgust at the manner of his death are justified and correct.

keep readingShow less
Big US investors prop up the nuclear weapons industry

ProStockStudio via shutterstock.com

Big US investors prop up the nuclear weapons industry

Military Industrial Complex

Nuclear weapons aren’t just a threat to human survival, they’re a multi-billion-dollar business supported by some of the biggest institutional investors in the U.S. according to new data released today by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) and PAX, the largest peace organization in the Netherlands.

For the third year in a row, globally, the number of investors in nuclear weapons producers has fallen but the overall amount invested in these companies has increased, largely thanks to some of the biggest investment banks and funds in the U.S.

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest