Try the new, improved Hartford Courant digital edition today
CT Now

Europe needs to pay more for its own defense [Letter]

Commentator Jules Witcover writes that President Obama "needs to put a bit of John Wayne in his words" vis-a-vis his handling of Russia over the Malaysian Airlines tragedy ("The Obama doctrine under fire," July 25).

Mr. Witcover acknowledges that interventionism may not be the best idea. But what is to be gained from a disparity between the president's words and actions he doesn't venture to say.

The airliner was flying from Europe with primarily European passengers aboard. Once again, the expectation seems to be that America needs to police the world, even on matters that have nothing to do with us.

Unquestionably, President Obama is a lame duck in the middle of his second-term stagnation. But lame duck or not, the president has correctly responded to a situation that has little to do with the United States and would not likely benefit from our intervention.

Insisting that the United States talk tough and do nothing sounds like a fool's errand better left to the European Union. Forcing Europeans to rely on themselves for defense could create a more formidable and unified opponent for Russian President Vladimir Putin, and one much closer than the United States.

According to the Cato Institute, EU nations are spending an ever-shrinking amount of money on their own defense; meanwhile the U.S. has by far the largest defense budget in the world, at more than $600 billion per year. Despite repeated calls to spend more money on their own defense, the EU has seen fit to remain a vassal state of the U.S.

If Europeans have any lingering doubts about their ability to defend themselves from Russia, perhaps they should consider funding a real military.

Jason Farrell, Baltimore

To respond to this letter, send an email to Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, CT Now
Related Content
  • The Tallinn declaration [Editorial]

    The Tallinn declaration [Editorial]

    Our view: President Obama needed to put Russia on notice that NATO is resolved to resist its aggression

  • U.S., Russia and the energy revolution

    U.S., Russia and the energy revolution

    Citing the American "fracking revolution" as a significant factor in Russia's economic crisis, writers Jim Rosapepe and Sheilah Kast go a bit overboard in linking it with the comparative success of capitalism and democracy ("How dangerous is Russia?" Dec. 22).

  • Russian 'menace' is overstated

    Russian 'menace' is overstated

    Jim Rosapepe and Sheilah Kast's commentary, "How dangerous is Russia?" (Dec. 22), sets up some straw men and creates a specter of menace over the current twist in Russian relations versus the West. But Russia never invaded the West while historically both Napoleon and Adolf Hitler invaded the giant...

  • Sanctions unlikely to work against Russia [Letter]

    Sanctions unlikely to work against Russia [Letter]

    Politicians and pundits are often blind to the political effects of sanctions ("Standing up to Moscow," July 29). But history shows that placing sanctions on Russia is likely to backfire.

  • Standing up to Moscow [Editorial]

    Standing up to Moscow [Editorial]

    Our view: Tough sanctions against Russia to punish its meddling in Ukraine show that the U.S. and its European allies can present a united front

  • U.S. should stay out of Ukraine [Letter]

    U.S. should stay out of Ukraine [Letter]

    President Barack Obama is right to refrain from action against Russia ("The Obama doctrine under fire," July 25). After years of war, the U.S. has learned its lesson: don't mess with a hornet's nest thousands of miles away.

  • Fingerprints


  • Putin is a thug, get used to it [Letter]

    Putin is a thug, get used to it [Letter]

    I almost thought your editorial on Russian President Putin and Ukraine was a joke ("Putin on the hot seat," July 21).