Wallachian Gazette

Please open Telegram to view this post

901 views21:51

— This type of statement is extremely worrying because it is a hands off approach that puts the defense of the country in the hands of foreign militaries which may or may not take interest in fighting any armed aggression. Read this post for more context.

Is NATO ready to defend Romania though from Russian aggression? Not really.

NATO has a little over 5000 men, half of those being American troops, stationed in Romania. 5000 troops for a country on NATOs Eastern Flank is pretty shameful and dismal, rather signalling disinterest.

For comparison, Germany hosts over 35k American troops not accounting for other allied NATO nations. Germany is not bordering Ukraine and yet represents a
far greater interest for the US than Romania.

Japan hosts over 50k American troops, with almost half on one single island, Okinawa. Yet, American officials have not, publicly, called China an enemy of democracy or are in the process of destroying their relations with.

So how are 5000 troops representing the “strongest security guarantees” Romania ever received? Sure the defense of Romania should be the given to the Romanian Army but we can’t expect the Romanian Army to be capable to fight an opponent like Russia, a country with a population nearly 10 times larger and with a military budget nearly 10 times bigger. (Romania spent 7 billion USD on defense, Russia is spent somewhere around 70 billion USD).

Clearly, American interest is in the Pacific and not NATO’s Eastern Flank because if it was, the American presence would be far larger. Romania to them is nothing more than a brake for the resurgent Russian empire, like Ukraine, and will be used as such to “wear down the Russian army”.

My recommendation for Tîlvăr and frankly, any serious politician that cares for Romania, would be to learn the lessons of the Little Entente and especially why it collapsed and it all began once the French told Germany they were fine with a redrawing of Czechoslovakia’s borders. Even though it started strong in 1921 beginning in 1933, Germany began to assert itself as the economic powerhouse of Europe and the anti-German and anti-Hungarian alliance that was the Little Entente immediately fell apart as soon as the French signed the Bled Agreement and later the no Munich Agreement.

France was instrumental in the creation of the Little Entente which was envisioned as an anti-Hungarian but also an anti-Soviet alliance. It was tough to get the signatories, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and Romania to form the alliance but without the French to hold it together, it quickly fell apart.

The same goes with NATO. Without American military personnel and assets, what good is it for? Not to mention the disinterest of other major NATO countries like Germany and France to fight a war with Russia (remember Emmanuel Macron’s Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok statement, the SPD in Germany has a long history of ties with Russia, add opposition parties in both countries which are openly pro-Russian, or pro-peace)

@Wallachian_Gazette