NATO is describing it as "a constant presence". The British prefer the word "persistent". Russia will no doubt call it "permanent".
Semantics, maybe, but important distinctions.
Under the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Agreement, the Alliance pledged not to permanently base troops in the former Warsaw Pact countries.
The key words at the time were "in the current and foreseeable security environment".
Russia has since held them to this, particularly so in recent years of heightened tensions.
But whichever way one comes at it, the truth is that the 'security environment' has changed in recent times.
NATO has now announced, in a somewhat uncoordinated manner it must be said, that four battalions will be stationed in the Baltic states and Poland.
By 'battalion', we're taking up to a thousand troops a piece. That's around 4,000 in all.
The contributing militaries will be the US, UK, Germany and Canada, although the latter is still tbc.
This move, of which we will hear more about at the NATO summit in Warsaw next month, is supposed to be a show of support for the more uneasy members of the alliance in the east.
Soldiers will serve short deployments, probably around six months at a time, possibly nine.
Families will not travel with them.
So that means none of the infrastructure that goes with 'permanent' basing: no married quarters, no schooling for children, no tours lasting years and more.
This is the how NATO can call it 'constant' rather than 'permanent'.
Think of it being similar to how forces were deployed to Afghanistan, rather than something along the lines of the UK or US presence in Germany.
NATO will have a permanent presence in these countries, but none of the troops will be permanently based there.
See what I mean by semantics?
But you could reasonably argue, that with those days of goodwill long past, NATO should go in stronger.
Commit to a permanent presence and say so without fear.
But this is a delicate standoff, which takes small steps at periodic moments.
Perception is what counts. And both sides know that.
No comments:
Post a Comment