The United States has concluded a defense cooperation agreement with all the countries on the eastern edge of NATO.
The defense cooperation agreements concluded with the United States benefit both the Nordic countries and the United States, and cause a headache for Russian military planning.
This is the opinion of the leading researcher of the Foreign Policy Institute Charly Salonius-Pasternak in a recent publication.
The agreement between Finland and the United States entered into force at the beginning of September. All the Nordic countries have just signed or renewed a defense cooperation agreement with the United States.
Salonius-Pasternak says that the DCA (defense cooperation agreement) acts as a glue between NATO’s national defense obligation (3rd) and common defense (5th) articles. It is more effective than just one state’s own defense, but faster than the entire NATO solution to defend its members.
– It is beneficial for both. The agreement speeds up deterrence and defense operations, if they need to be activated.
Salonius-Pasternak follows the United States and security policy.
In the comment publication published by Upi on Friday, attention is drawn to the fact that the United States has defense cooperation agreements with all the countries on the eastern edge of NATO, from the Arctic Ocean to the Black Sea.
In Europe, the United States has only accepted NATO members as allies.
Borders are no longer a barrier
In the Nordic countries, the states that have concluded a defense cooperation agreement have particularly emphasized the benefits of the agreements for themselves. The researcher reminds that the agreement has benefited the United States in many ways.
When, for example, all the Nordic countries have similar agreements, the borders between the countries do not limit the military planning of the United States, but it can plan the advance storage of supplies quite freely.
On the NATO borders against Russia, the United States and its allies can create more headaches for Russia’s military planning. For example, placing long-range weapons in the borderlands means that Russia has to take this into account along the entire eastern edge and on the one hand all the way to the Urals.
Salonius-Pasternak compares the situation to Ukraine, where Western countries have debated whether donated weapons are allowed to attack strategic targets on Russian soil. There are also strategic targets deeper in Russia, and pre-storage of long-range weapons increases the chances of reacting if a similar situation were to arise.
DCA acts as a deterrent, says Salonius-Pasternak. Because of the agreements, Russia has a higher threshold to carry out an operation to which NATO would not react but which would still be harmful.
– Even if it wasn’t immediately NATO, there would be a significantly stronger entity and the countries could operate across borders.
With its bilateral agreements, the United States has created, in a way, another alliance alongside NATO.
The agreements are also beneficial for the global role of the United States. According to the article, the countries that have signed the agreement are likely to act in harmony in situations where there is a common security interest.