The NATO the I used to know

 

The NATO that I used to know

There is now an avowed crisis in NATO, an organization that has been unable to inspire confidence in the citizens it is supposed to protect. Pity it does such a good job to protect its supposed reputation, but that's bureaucracy for you.

This article has been inspired by a Wall Street Journal piece which is singularly below the usual high standard of journalistic integrity they apply, and that can be found here:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-countries-defense-spending-europe-russia-ukraine-2cae6723?st=ei8f5zo4ptb4txq

While the article quotes official sources the message is deceptive: on reading it one would think European members of NATO have largely mended their miserly ways and are now serious about being actually able to defend themselves, while reality projects a very different message. There are points that are particularly misleading so I will parse it.

“Some 23 of 32 NATO member countries are on track to spend at least 2% of their economy on national defense in 2024. That’s up from a mere six in 2018 and three in 2014, when members agreed to the 2% floor. “

Well that would look good unless one doesn't delve deeper here:

[source here]

The fact that these are “estimates” should bug anyone with enough of a pulse to think that there is a whole calendar here in between the Russian attack on Ukraine and 2024, which means that reaction times of western European countries to threats are between sloooooooow and nonexistent. Moreover, the great bunch is concentrated on the dead center, slightly above 2% of GDP total and a bit over 25% on equipment.

Also, there are facetious thoughts like this one:

“But even Germany, France and the Netherlands are on track to squeak above 2% in 2024. Ditto for Albania and Montenegro. The prize for embarrassment goes to Canada, which is wealthy enough to devote more than a mere 1.37% to defense. Spain is a more predictable but still deplorable low at 1.28%. Both countries should be told to meet their burdens or they’ll be replaced as members by better allies. “

Pray, which countries? Italy with its meager 1.4%, or the UK that halved its previous level of spending under the Tories and it's now headed towards a Labour government? Or the DEI obsessed US?

But the crucial point is this:

“But Americans rightly don’t want NATO to devolve into another impotent international institution, and that requires U.S. leadership. That’s all the more crucial as European weapons production will take years to rebuild from its desiccated state, even as countries commit more money now. “

Well, the real point, which has been used by Europeans above everyone else is that it is patently daft to think about defense expenditure (or help for Ukraine, where that technique is even more blatant) in terms of MONEY. The key issue is capabilities, and here NATO is woefully inadequate, and knows it.

Think about it like this: the goal of reaching and maintaining 2% of GDP was conceived to ensure that in case of problems there would be sufficient reserves in hardware and ammunition to face the threats, with an adequate strategy to boot. Now I freely admit that this was a wild dream in a continent which picked Von Der Leyen, an active destroyer of that very concept, as European Commission president.

What's missing is that the lack of investment in infrastructure, plants, maintenance and above all ammunition makes  that 2% inadequate to serve the same needs now, and all monetary measures of defense utterly pathetic on two counts, one bad and one worse.

 The bad one is that your mileage may vary only for the worse: when EU countries did not spend and starved their defense establishment, unit costs for spares and ammo were lower, much lower than now. So, as the Red Queen said, "A slow sort of country!" said the Queen. "Now, here, you see, it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place. If you want to get somewhere else, you must run at least twice as fast as that!" .

The second, which is worse, is that a EU leadership raised  at the NIRP tit has the tendency to think that, as in the distorted finance their tame central banks wrought, three bullets two years from now are worth a bullet now, if you go into hock. As if Ukrainians could destry Russian invaders by launching promissory notes at them with a Trebouchet.

Make no mistakes, Putin might be evil but he's not as stupid. This behaviour has already cost thousand of lives. I fervently hope it won't cost more.