Donald Trump's plans for the Baltic countries are a gift for Putin. Congress takes up a fight
In a Monday interview with Kyiv Post Richard Kauslarich, who in 1993-94 during the rule of Bill Clinton served as a special representative of the President for new independent countries, He expressed his concern about Trump's latest plans regarding the withdrawal from several safety help programs for countries bordering Russia, including the Baltic Safety Initiative and other related programs.
These initiatives were of key importance to ensuring military training and equipment for countries such as Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.
A dangerous signal for Moscow
“I understand the willingness to encourage our European allies to take more burden on defense,” Kauslarich said. – But there are better ways to achieve this than limiting help for smaller NATO countries that are in the face of the greatest threat from Russia.
Kauslarich, a diplomat with extensive experience in the post -Soviet world, warned that this policy is a strategic mistake that would be used by the United States opponents.
Continued article under video material
– We should set an example by encouraging larger allies to make the same obligations. The security of the Baltic countries is our security. This sends the wrong signal to Putin at the wrong time – 85 years after the invasion of the USSR and the occupation of the Baltic States – he emphasized.
In his opinion, from a global perspective, this is a bad moment. – this is the case shortly after the Szow peak [Szanghajskiej Organizacji Współpracy] In China, during which countries supporting Russia in the war with Ukraine showed mutual sympathy, so the optics is completely wrong – he assessed.
Although Kauslarich is deeply concerned about this situation, he also drew attention to political challenges in Washington. – Most Congress members is not very willing to question President Trump's decision in this matter – he said.
Contradictory signals
A high -ranking Trump administration clerk, providing anonymity, maintained that plans for budget cuts in the security area were coordinated with European countries and They are part of a larger plan aimed at ensuring that “Europe will take more responsibility for its own defense.”
However, representatives of defense departments in the Baltic countries publicly stated that They did not receive an official notification about cutswhich further enhances the atmosphere of uncertainty.
This decision is perceived by many as a misleading, ambiguous signal, especially since it occurs after a period in which the same countries significantly increased their defense expenses. Despite the pessimism of Kauslarich about the general will of the congress, Legislators do not remain passive.
Congress reacts
A group of senators from both parties, headed by Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a democrat dealing with foreign policy, presented a significant amendment last week to the annual act on authorization to national defense [National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA]. It is considered necessary.
Shaheen's amendment is a direct attempt to strengthen Congress power in the field of foreign policy. It prohibits the administration of reducing the number of American soldiers on NATO's eastern flank, as long as the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of State does not formally certify against Congress that such a move will not threaten the safety of allies.
Including this requirement to the NDAA Act, legislators They create a solid control over the executive And they provide a more stable and predictable basis for the foreign policy of the United States.
Senator of the Democratic Party Jeanne ShaheenMandel NGAN / AFP / AFP
Senator Shaheen also wants to introduce additional provisions to the NDAA Act, which require the Pentagon consultation with the Congress before the introduction of any changes in the arrangement of the US armed forces in Europe.
These measures are aimed at preventing chaotic and sudden displacement of troops, which characterized previous military activities.
Kyiv Post turned to the White House and the office of Senator Shaheen on Monday with a request for comment, but until the publication of this article did not receive an answer.
Fight for the soul of US foreign policy
These legislative maneuvers are more than just a financial dispute. – It is a fight for the soul of the US foreign policy itself – As he put one of the Congress advisers in an interview with Kyiv Post.
For decades, the so -called “imperial presidency” strengthened control over military and diplomatic decisions in the USA. Shaheen amendment and other similar actions are “a direct and thoughtful attempt to regain his constitutional role by the Congress,” said the informant. This move is both a reprimand for the unpredictable approach of administration and a strong assurance for European allies.
By binding the US obligations with the legislative process, the Congress signals to its partners that his support is not based on the political whims of one administration, But on a long -term, supra -party consensus.
For the inhabitants of Eastern Europe, who are in the face of the direct threat of aggression from Russia, “this legislative action ensures certainty that was so lacking” – said the Congress adviser.
“This is a testimony to the permanent conviction that America's security is inseparable from the strength and stability of its alliances,” he concluded.
