Burden-Sharing between Western States in Containing Russia and China

The early 2020s saw two simultaneous confrontations between Euro-Atlantic community and Russia, as well as between the USA, its partners and China. It required Western democracies to elaborate the scheme of distribution when it comes to using land forces (army). The latter suffered most from military downsizing in the 1990s – early 2010s, being partly in a state of dystrophy. The article, based on the theories of armed forces building and alliances, studies these processes. The paper focuses on NATO as an institute, on the USA, and on Germany as a key European contributor to multilateral NATO forces. The major documents such as the new strategic concept of the Alliance and New NATO Force Model were adopted at the Madrid summit (2022, June). The second document has provided the Organization with potential 800 thousand troops. The vast majority of them are to be committed by its European member states. It means their troops’ contribution to deterring Russia is of utmost importance, with the American role being politically significant, though practically limited. This has given the USA strategic freedom to exploit large part of its armed forces, first of all land ones, with a view to containing China. The consensus on the specified distribution of responsibility formed not in 2014, but in 2021. The paper investigates the tactics of the USA as a key beneficiary to encourage its partners to adopt the scheme of Vietnam war experience. The author compares practical readiness of major European member states to use armed forces to deter Russia. The paper studies in detail the changes of the US land force groupings in Europe, especially in Eastern Europe and Germany, as well as in the Far East. The article presents the features of structuring military cooperation between Western countries and their partners in the Pacific Ocean in the context of containing China. The author concludes by outlining general features of and prospects for the evolution of the scheme as regards military responsibility distribution.

1. Aleshin A.A. (2023). Velikobritanija v mnogostoronnih voenno-politicheskih strukturah [The UK in multilateral military-political structures]. Analiz i prognoz. Zhurnal IMEMO RAN. No 3. P. 35–48. DOI: 10.20542/afij-2023-3-35-48

2. Ananieva E. V. (2023). Right-wing forces in the UK [Pravye sily v Britanii]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 3. P. 105–129. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2023.04.06

3. Arzamanova T.V. (2022). Otdel'nye aspekty strategicheskogo planirovaniya Germanii v Indo-Tikhookeanskom regione v usloviyakh vozvrashcheniya sopernichestva velikikh derzhav [Some aspects of German strategic planning in Indo-Pacific region facing the return of great power rivalry]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 4. P. 258–284. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2022.04.11

4. Belinsky A.V., Nikulichev Yu.V. (2019). «Amerikanskie gorki»: Evolyutsiya otnosheniy mezhdu SShA i FRG v 1989–2019 gg. [«American rollercoaster»: the evolution of US–Germany relations from 1989 to 2019]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 4. P. 135–157. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2019.04.08

5. Biscop S. (2022). The New Force Model: NATO’s European Army? Egmont Policy Brief. No. 285. 6 p.

6. Davidson P.B. (2002). Voyna vo V'etname. 1946–1975. [Vietnam at War: The History: 1946–1975]. Moscow: Eksmo. 816 p.

7. Fleckenstein B. (1990). Fremde Truppen im Vereinigten Deutschland – Gegenwärtige Situation und künftige Aussichten. SOWI-Arbeitspapier. No. 44. 12 s.

8. Istomin I.A. (2017). Sovremennaya zapadnaya teoriya voenno-politicheskikh al'yansov dostizheniya i lakuny [Western theory of international military alliances the state of the discipline]. Mezhdunarodnye protsessy. Vol. 15. No. 4. P. 93–114. DOI:10.17994/IT.2017.15.4.51.6

9. Istomin I.A., Sokolov A.P. (2021). Amerikanskiy kontingent v FRG: simvol bezopasnosti, garant loyal'nosti, predmet roskoshi? [American Forces in Germany: security symbol, loyalty warrant or excessive luxury?]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 65. No. 3. P. 60–72. DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-3-60-72

10. Istomin I.A. (2023). Vashington – Seul – Tokio v doktrine Baydena [Washington-Seoul-Tokyo triangle in the Biden doctrine]. Rossiya v global'noy politike. No. 3. P. 208–212. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6439- 2023-21-3-208-212

11. Ivanov O.P. (2020). Voennoe izmerenie Indo-Tikhookeanskoy strategii SShA [Military dimension of the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy]. Obozrevatel'. No. 7. P. 39–52.

12. Karaganov S.A. (2024). Vek voyn? Stat'ya vtoraya. Chto delat' [An age of wars? article two. what is to be done]. Rossiya v global'noy politike. No. 2. P. 37–52. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6439-2024-22-2- 37-52

13. Lauch Z. (2022). Osnovy operativnogo myshleniya NATO. Retrospektivnyy analiz opera-tivnogo myshleniya 80-h gg. i otsenka perspektiv razvitiya [Fundamentals of NATO operational thinking. Retrospective analysis of operational thinking of the 80-s and assessment of development prospects]. Tula: Akvarius, 2022. 268 p.

14. Mills C. (2023). Military assistance to Ukraine since the Russian invasion. London: House of Commons Library. 69 p.

15. Ostankov V.I. (2004). Uspeshnoe reshenie problem stroitel'stva Vooruzhennykh Sil – vazhneyshee uslovie obespecheniya natsional'noy bezopasnosti [Successful solution of the problems of the Armed Forces building is the most important condition for ensuring national security]. In: Yu. N. Baluevskij (ed.) Voennaja bezopasnost' Rossijskoy Federatsii v ХХI veke. Moscow: CVSI. P. 210–226.

16. Pukhov R.N. (2024). Ot «spetsial'noy» k «voennoy» [From “Special” to “Military”]. Rossiya v global'noy politike. No. 2. P. 21–36. DOI: 10.31278/1810-6439-2024-22-2-21-36

17. Shlykov P.V. (2020). Mezhdu SShA, Evropoy i Evraziey: transformatsiya vneshnepoliticheskikh prioritetov Turtsii [Between the US, the EU and Eurasia: transformation of foreign policy priorities of Turkey]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No 1. P. 110–135. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2020.01.06

18. Sidorov A.S. (2020). «Evropeyskaya oborona» cherez prizmu frantsuzskikh interesov i vozmozhnostey [European Defenсe through the prism of France’s interests and capabilities]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 4. P. 137–169. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2020.04.07

19. Sidorov A.S. (2022). Voenno-politicheskiy balans vozmozhnostey Frantsii v Sakhele: etapy i mekhanizmy vyhoda s TVD [The military-political balance of France’s capabilities in the Sahel: stages and mechanisms of exit from the theater of operations]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 4. P. 79–107. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2022.04.04

20. Timofeev P.P., Khorolskaya M.V. (2022). Podkhody franko-germanskogo tandema k vzaimodeystviyu s Turtsiey v ochagakh nestabil'nosti Sredizemnomor'ya [Approaches of the Franco-German tandem to interaction with Turkey in the hotbeds of instability in the Mediterranean]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 4. P. 134–159. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2022.04.06

21. Varwick J. (2007). Nordatlantische Allianz. In: S. Schmidt, G. Hellmann, R. Wolf (Hrsg.) Handbuch zur deutschen Außenpolitik. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/ GWV Fachverlage GmbH. P. 763–778.

22. Vasiliev V.S. (2022). Anglosaksonskie skrizhali narastayushchego global'nogo tsivilizatsionnogo protivostoyaniya [Anglo-saxon guidestones of growing global confrontation between civilizations]. Aktual'nye problemy Evropy. No. 4. P. 234–257. DOI: 10.31249/ape/2022.04.10