American military power is still needed in Europe. Don't pretend it isn't. We're simply replacing the Europe-first policy with an Asia-first policy.
Yes, European NATO states need to carry more of the burden of dealing with Russia and Iran.
Colby argues for a more sensible division of labor. “America,” he writes, “should laser-focus its military on Asia, reducing its level of forces and expenditures in Europe.… Meanwhile, Europe should focus on taking the lead on Ukraine and, more broadly, assuming the primary role in its own conventional defense.” This division of labor would enable the United States to rely less on economic warfare against China, thereby lessening the strain on the Atlantic alliance.
I've certainly said NATO doesn't need America nearly as much as our allies in Asia need us. We need to fill gaps in NATO capabilities more than anything:
While the China threat is more pressing, Europe has the power to blunt Russia, as long as America is there in NATO to knit together the European military forces scattered across the continent.
And Russia's self-immolation in Ukraine buys European NATO states time to rebuild their military.
As for Iran, with the Abraham Accords we have the nucleus of a local coalition that Europeans could increase their support for, without needing to deploy many forces.
That said, I don't think it has been a mistake to send help to Ukraine. America needs a forward defense in Asia and Europe. That proposed division of labor requires Europe to be secure enough for America to further pivot to Asia. That requires the Russian threat to be defeated and not simply assumed away.
In World War II, even after Japan struck America first, America had a Europe-first policy based on the need to defeat the more powerful Nazi threat. But while America focused on deploying and using power in Europe, that didn't mean America ignored the Pacific. America initially even deployed more power in the Pacific to hold the Japanese at bay.
Also, don't forget that America has already withdrawn a lot of military power from Europe and the Atlantic! This reduction was made possible not by additional European military power but by the great reduction of the threat from the Soviet Union--geographically and militarily. No American fleets roam the Mediterranean Sea or guard Atlantic supply lines. Aircraft don't darken the skies of Europe. The Army doesn't possess a multi-corps army to hold back the enemy. You want reduced American power in Europe to focus on Asia?
Done!
The increased American presence in Europe since Russia invaded Ukraine (again) is a pittance compared to the legions that once guarded Europe.
Further, much of the early war decisive weapons America sent--Javelins and Stingers--are older (but obviously still very good) weapons that will eventually be replaced. Sending Ukraine some of that stockpile to defeat an avowed enemy makes sense rather than holding them to eventually scrap. And the war is an alarm to build up our production capacity to cover war ammunition usage and weapons replacement. I just don't see an early war against China need for Javelins and 155mm ammunition. Or Stingers beyond what we've held back from Ukraine.
I'll also ask, when the issue is "diverting" forces to Europe, where do we put all the military units that we're supposed to commit to Asia with a "laser-like" focus? We don't need to cram ships into the few ports and planes onto few air bases to make them target-rich environments for Chinese missile attacks.
In addition, too much of a reduction in American power committed to NATO will just encourage the European Union to exploit that to kick America out of Europe--not to focus on Russia's threats.
Pivoting to the main front of Asia requires a secure Europe. And reducing the
Russian threat is key to that. It is an economy-of-force front, but a front that still requires American force. History is rhyming and Putin clearly gets the supporting role.
I'm all on board helping Ukraine stop Russia now, as far east as possible, to minimize the need for American military power n Europe. Flipping the Russian threat to an ally--as in if China invaded Hell I'd make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons--would be better.
NOTE: Winter War of 2022 updates continue here.
