Editor's note: Seymur Mammadov is director of the international expert club EurAsiaAz and editor-in-chief of Azerbaijan's news agency Vzglyad.az. The article reflects the author's opinion and not necessarily the views of CGTN. 

Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Congress agreed on a 738 billion-U.S. dollar military budget on December 10 for fiscal year 2020, an increase of 3.1 percent from a year earlier. Of the 738 billion dollars that will be allocated for defense, 71.5 billion are earmarked for financing operations abroad.

Among other things, the bill includes a number of paragraphs relating to Washington's counteraction to "various threats," to which lawmakers ranked Russia and China. In particular, congressmen once again extended the embargo on direct cooperation with Moscow in the military field, obliged the Trump administration to impose sanctions on the Russian Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream gas pipelines in order to ensure "European energy security."

Frankly, the U.S. desire to build up its military budget, which is growing steadily from year to year, is not much of a surprise. Let's take a look at the statistics on the growth of U.S. military spending over the past few years.

In 2016, the U.S. military budget amounted to 607 billion dollars. In 2017 — more than 618 billion dollars; in 2018 — almost 700 billion, while in 2019, the budget grew to 716 billion dollars. The U.S. military presence in the world is growing, and NATO's militarization continues to gain momentum, and therefore, new threats and challenges for developing countries arise, and most importantly, all these processes emanating from the U.S. push countries such as Russia, Turkey and other countries to the arms race in order to defend their territorial integrity and sovereignty.

How can they not build up their military capabilities in the face of a growing threat from the United States?

It is important to consider another important question: Where will the U.S. military spending be distributed? The fact that a significant part of military spending will be aimed at strengthening the U.S. military presence in the Middle East causes me great doubt. Perhaps a small portion will be spent on restoring infrastructure in the region, but nothing more. 

It no longer makes sense to invest big money in the Middle East, at least in Syria, for sure. After the start of a Turkish military operation called "Source of Peace" in northern Syria against the Kurds, the Americans actually lost this region. As a result of this operation, the United States abandoned its advanced positions; its military infrastructure. In Syria, Washington no longer relies on anyone — neither the Turks nor the Kurds, whom the Americans have betrayed.

On the other hand, the buildup of the U.S. military presence in the Middle East is also restrained by another factor: The internal challenge. The opponents of war in the United States have grown to an extreme degree.

The U.S. military and political establishment understands that the American people are already tired of the endless and meaningless wars in the Middle East. Surveys conducted in the U.S. are a vivid confirmation of this. Donald Trump would not have become the President of the United States if, during his campaign, he supported the continuation of military operations in the region.

If this is not the Middle East, then which region will undergo further militarization in 2020? Europe. Today, Americans have spent billions of dollars to create their own military infrastructure in the region, and intend to do so in the future. If the first reason is the Russian "threat" factor for Europe, the second reason is China's growing international reputation in Europe.

Speaking specifically about Russia, in fairness, it is worth noting that the attitude of Europeans towards Russia has changed over the past few years. In Europe, there is a growing understanding of the need for close cooperation with Russia, which can be relied on not only in the energy issue, but also in other issues. The Germans and French are strongly interested in good relations with Russia.

The Norman Four summit, which was recently held in Paris, indicates that Europe is already tired of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and is interested in resolving it as soon as possible because if this conflict is resolved, a new opportunity will open up for closer cooperation between Europe and Russia. 

If it were not for U.S. pressure, European countries would be unlikely to be on the list of countries that applied sanctions against Russia because of Ukraine.

As for China's international influence in Europe, the Belt and Road Initiative, which had previously raised more doubts, is now provoking sympathy in the region. This happened for one simple reason: All the countries that joined this initiative benefited greatly from such cooperation; including in Asia, Europe, and in South America. As a result, there is a clear tendency to increase trust in China around the world

Trust is the most important core in interstate relations. China is gaining the confidence of Europeans, despite the growing pressure of Americans on its allies. The latter are increasingly aware of the need for in-depth integration with China, which was not the case before. At the heart of Europe's growing confidence in China, of course, is Beijing's peaceful policy.

Thus, we see a decrease in the level of U.S. trust in Europe, while the confidence of Russia and China in Europe is steadily growing. Europeans want more independence from the U.S. and their own army. Only two countries can free Europe from American influence: Russia and China, which, with their useful infrastructure projects, have proved their commitment to developing friendly relations with Europe.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com)