MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Viktor Litovkin.) A minor scandal broke out at the Russia-NATO Council summit in Brussels.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov commented on the agreement between Romania and the United States on the deployment of four American military bases: "We are engaged in a dialog with the United States, and it has been settled that all changes to military structures should be transparent and comply with agreements on stability in Europe." Moreover, "we are interested how these changes fit in with the adapted Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty," he said. "Unfortunately, our Western colleagues have used various far-fetched excuses not to ratify this document."
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov also commented on the new agreement. "We were aware of these plans," he said. "The American leadership notified us about them. However, we do not know the total strength and intended use of these bases, and our response will depend on that."
According to news agencies, the agreement on deploying U.S. bases in Romania was signed in Bucharest on December 6 by Romanian Foreign Minister Razvan Ungureanu and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Four bases will be deployed near Constanta on the Black Sea coast and in Babadag, Cincu and Smardan in the south-east. These are military aerodromes, where modernized Soviet-made MiG 23 planes are deployed.
The aerodrome near Constanta was used for transporting Romanian and NATO troops to Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003.
Under the new agreement, the Pentagon will invest over $20 million just to modernize the Kogalniceanu base near Constanta. At a joint news conference with Condoleezza Rice, Romanian President Traian Basescu said that the bases would be used "to train U.S. army units and supply the necessary military equipment." The agreement is "of great military and political importance," he said, as "it means that Romanian people have recognized the necessity of American troops' presence in the country. It is also Romania's contribution to ensuring international security."
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that the bases in Romania would be smaller than American bases in Germany during the Cold War. They will be rudimentary forward operating sites, rather than the large permanent bases, he said. Most U.S. forces will be based in the United States, but they need to be flexible and rapidly deployable to respond to transnational threats like terrorism and can't be tied down on large overseas installations, he added. "It's a good thing for Romania. It's a good thing for the United States," Rumsfeld said.
Obviously, it is a good thing for Romania. It will receive not only political and military support, but also economic aid, President Basescu said.
For a country suffering from high unemployment after joining the EU and NATO, jobs at American military bases are very important. It is also good for the United States, but for another reason. In November 2003, Rumsfeld signed the Joint Operational Concepts, which listed ten strategic priorities of the U.S. defense agency for the following years. It also set the task of transforming the armed forces in order to successfully wage the global war on international terrorism.
To do so the United States intends to integrate all branches of troops in separate inter-branch groups that can be quickly sent to any place of the world to fulfill tasks set by the Pentagon and the White House in any geographic conditions, any climate and using special kinds of weapons.
This is the purpose of the new bases in Europe. They will store the necessary arms and equipment so that when Herculeses with GIs arrive, they could get to the right place in time. Keeping in mind that six European NATO members have 150 U.S. B61 free-fall nuclear bombs that can be carried by U.S. F16C/D planes, including from the Lithuanian aerodrome in Siauliai, the concern voiced by Lavrov and Ivanov is understandable. The bases, as well as American radar systems built in the Baltic states, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and even Azerbaijan, and the missile interceptor base Washington wants to deploy in Poland, plus the new bases in Romania and, possibly, Bulgaria are moving closer to the Russian border.
Back to the Brussels scandal and its essence. The new bases do not seem to fit in with the CFE Treaty because it is so far not known what arms and equipment will be there.
The Treaty stipulates the use of tanks, armored vehicles and artillery with a caliber over 100-mm, airplanes, helicopters and personnel. But their number and purpose in Romania and elsewhere cannot be verified: the United States, as well as other NATO members, have not ratified the adapted Treaty using all sorts of implausible excuses. What should Russian generals do?
Can they believe what they are told? After all, this is a serious matter. The country's security is at issue, and it is in the nature of the military to prepare for the worst. This means a new arms race, a backslide to the Cold War. Do we really need that?
This raises another question: does Russia need the CFE Treaty? The United States has withdrawn from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. NATO refuses to ratify the CFE, demanding that Moscow honor its Istanbul commitments (made at the OSCE summit in 1999), although their fulfillment was hindered by NATO leaders.
General Yuri Baluyevsky, Russian chief of Staff, has once proposed to give up all obligations of transparency Russia has undertaken. Should we do as he says? After all, the recent moves of our NATO allies push us toward this decision.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and may not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial board.
