Dokumentation: US-Kommandeur zur Bedeutung von Landstreitkräften, Interoperabilität – und zu Kaliningrad

Veröffentlicht am von

Die kurze Ansprache, die US-General Chris Donahue bereits am vergangenen Mittwoch in Wiesbaden zur Eröffnung der LANDEURO-Konferenz gehalten hat, wurde zwar international beachtet, in Deutschland kommt sie erst langsam an: Der Kommandeur der US-Landstreitkräfte in Europa, zugleich für diesen Bereich auch NATO-Kommandeur, sprach von der Abschreckungslinie an der Ostflanke, der Notwendigkeit der Interoperabilität im Bündnis – und davon, dass sich die Allianz darauf vorbereite (und sicher sei), die russische Exklave Kaliningrad innerhalb kurzer Zeit militärisch ausschalten zu können.

Nun ist nicht erstaunlich, dass der kommandierende General der U.S. Army Europe and Africa die These aufstellt, dass Landstreitkräfte immer wichtiger werden – weil sie mit weit reichenden Waffen gegnerische Systeme in einem Umfang ausschalten könnten, wie das früher eigentlich nur Luftstreitkräften möglich war. Aber Donahue argumentiert auch, dass das der Kern der Eastern Flank Deterrence Line sei, der Abschreckung an der Ostflanke der NATO. Und zugleich eine Blaupause für die Entwicklung der Abschreckung durch Landstreitkräfte weltweit.

In dem Zusammenhang erwähnte der General die russische Exklave Kaliningrad, zwischen Polen und Litauen an der Ostsee, und die dort stationierte Möglichkeit der russischen Streitkräfte, eine so genannte A2/AD-Bubble aufzubauen: eine Blase mit Anti-Access/Area Denial, also eine große Sperre rund um das Gebiet von Kaliningrad selbst. Dass Donahue sehr trocken mitteilte, die NATO könne die russischen Fähigkeiten dort ausschalten, und zwar sehr schnell, hat bereits zu empörten Reaktionen aus Russland geführt. (Auch wenn, das nur als Anmerkung, wiederum von russischer Seite die militärische Stärke Kaliningrads gerne als Machtfaktor gegen Europa ins Feld geführt wird.)

Da die LANDEURO eine Konferenz auch unter Beteiligung der Industrie ist, nutzte Donahue seine Eröffnungsansprache auch dafür, die Rüstungsindustrie anzusprechen: Sie müsse sich bewusst sein, dass ihre Systeme für alle NATO-Mitglieder und -Partner kompatibel sein müssten. Diese Interoperabilität sei ein Kern der künftigen Ausstattung von Streitkräften. Für Luftverteidigung wie für weit reichende Abstandswaffen bedeute das unter anderem die Entwicklung eines common launcher, eines gemeinsamen Startgeräts für unterschiedliche Systeme.

Die Kollegen von Defense News waren zwar offensichtlich in Wiesbaden dabei und haben mit ihrem Bericht, auf den sich die deutschen Medien überwiegend beziehen, das Thema erst auf die Tagesordnung gebracht. Aber damit sich hierzulande jeder selbst ein Bild machen kann, die Ansprache Donahues als Video zum Anschauen und das Transkript der wesentlichen Passagen:

 

 

(…)

Now what I want to talk about is really what is our role – as the military , what do we have to produce ?

The first thing is, especially for the US military , but also for the 32 members of NATO, South Korea, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, and you’ll see many of these other four countries from Asia here as well, if you were to go across to SAGUN and SATU , you see them there. Why? Because we understand the global threat. So what is our role here? So, as the Landcom commander for NATO, and the United States Army Europe Africa commander , our previous bosse , General Wolters, General Cavoli, and now General George in particular as we drive what we have to do out here and what is that specifically so as we talk about everything that all these things that everybody talks about what is the specificity required to truly make that change ?

Well , the first thing is those previous leaders have converged all the plans and so that we have unity of effort and unity of exactly what we have to do and they’re called the regional plans Within those regional plans, we started in the Baltics to try to get to how do you actually make it so that industry and the nations know exactly what the requirements are .

Ultimately, that is now known as the eastern flank deterrence line. The eastern flank deterrence line is the capability that hinges all these regional plans together. So as we all talk about these things that are so important, the use of data, you actually can use data. So whenever we talk about how are we gonna use these new forms of mass, the unmanned systems. Well , how do you build that to a standard that you can actually fight it throughout an alliance, but as important because this is global, how do you use it in the Middle East? How do you use it in the Pacific?

So all these standards have to be, and that’s what the eastern flank deterrence line will bring to all of us here. And then specifically, we started in the Baltics. And we know exactly what we have to develop. And the use case that we’re using is, is you have to from the ground and if you now look at everything that is happening throughout the world, the land domain is not becoming less important, rather, it’s becoming more important .

You can now take down A2/AD bubbles from the ground. You can now take over sea from the ground. All of those things you’re watching it happen in Ukraine , but as important for us. How do we put that into these regional plans, into the eastern flank deterrence line? If you look at Kaliningrad and it’s, you know, you can argue back and forth, but it’s about 47 miles wide. Surrounded by NATO on all sides. There’s absolutely no reason why that A2/AD bubble, to deter Russia, we cannot take that down from the ground in a time frame that is unheard of and faster than we’ve ever been able to do.

We’ve already planned that, we’ve already developed it. The mass and momentum problem that Russia poses to us, a problem that we could pose, get faced anywhere else in the world. We’ve developed the capability to make sure that we can stop that mass and momentum problem, approximately 22 divisions worth of capability and then of course all of us have to make sure that we have offensive capability, probably the most difficult , so those three things we have developed.

And,we’re ready to and we just had the conference of European armies over the last two days where we went over this entire concept with each of the chiefs. Many of the chads have already seen this, so we know the exact use case that we have. So everybody can talk about how we need to use data and all these other things. So what we’ve done with this is we’ve talked about the system. NATO has already procured the system. We already know exactly that what we have to do with cloud, and we know exactly the type of actual unmanned systems, brigades, and everything else that we need .

So if you’re industry, we can tell you exactly what we need. And then for industry, you’ll also sit there and say, OK, well, can you help us out with a little bit more specificity. Absolutely. So for industry, very specifically, what we would like you to start to look at, is that anything that we develop. It has to be interoperable. But I want to talk a little bit more about the specificity of interoperability .

The first thing that we always talk about is data. We need industry to mitigate. The risk that every nation sees in data. So if we talk about cloud you as industry have to come in and talk about how we can share data without that nation being concerned about where that data is gonna be. We know that we can solve this every day. Whenever we look at modular systems and we talk about what we need with modular systems and what this is what the Army Transformation Initiative and Secretary Driscoll and General George are trying to push and this is exactly what our allies are looking for as well and I everyone loves to talk about long range fires and air defense so specifically what we want to develop is a common launcher. A common launcher that is both offensive and defensive capable. We want a common fire control system. So that any nation can use that fire control system.

Right now, there are many nations that if they buy a platform, and another nation buys that platform, they’re not interoperable because of that lack of common operating system. It’s trust , that’s all that is. We can solve it .

And then obviously we want everything to be optionally manned. So if we look out for an air defense system or a long range fire system, we want it to be one system, optionally manned, and we won’t be able to take munitions from any country and shoot through that .

That’s just one example of many. And then we know that there’s also a bureaucracy involved in this, and the United States has taken on reform of foreign military sales and you’re already seeing the changes that are coming. We already know that we’re now having actual things that we’re being allowed to move at a higher rate of speed and getting approved faster.

(Foto:  Gen. Christopher G. Donahue, U.S. Army Europe and Africa commanding general, delivers opening remarks at the LANDEURO Conference in Wiesbaden, Germany, July 16, 2025 – Staff Sgt. Samuel Kim/U.S. Army Europe and Africa; Videoquelle: U.S. Army Europe and Africa via Dvidshub, dort auch in höherer Auflösung verfügbar)