Drones, doubts as US allies look to Nato summit

As Estonia's defence minister opened a tech conference this week focused heavily on cutting-edge military equipment, he said his nation's strategy in the face of mounting Russian pressure was to turn itself into a “fly that can paralyse an elephant”.

- Peter Apps

Estonia and its fellow nearby Baltic states of Latvia and Lithuania are among the first of America's allies to make good on US President Donald Trump's demand that they devote at least 5% of their gross domestic product on defence.

That means a combination of conscription, drones, long-range rockets and “whole-of-society” efforts to prepare for war.

It’s an approach increasingly being advocated for what might be termed a whole new generation of “frontline” governments and states from Finland and Romania to Taiwan and the Philippines.

It's also being talked of in more established Western militaries such as those of the US and Britain, with speculation that upcoming reforms will put much lower emphasis on heavy equipment such as tanks and more on unmanned systems, such as drones.

But it’s also an approach leaving some worried that excessive talk of technology is being used as an excuse to fail to provide the forces that may still be needed to win or deter a war.

Earlier this month, the new US ambassador to Nato, Matthew Whitaker, confirmed what had been rumoured for months — that the US intends to cut back troops stationed on the continent, although he said discussions on this were unlikely to start until after the Nato summit in the Dutch capital, The Hague.

“President Trump just said... this is going to happen and it's going to happen now,” Mr Whitaker told a conference in Estonia earlier this month.

“This is going to be orderly, but we are not to have any more patience for foot-dragging in this situation... We just need to work through the practical consequences.”

US officials have made it clear they intend to use that meeting to push every Nato member to spend at least 5% of their GDP on defence, more than twice what many of them commit to at present.

How that discussion goes may shape how many US troops stay.