E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

Why U.S. troops should stay in Germany
The Pentagon is proposing sharp cuts in U.S. forces in Germany, which for more than half a century has been America’s biggest military outpost in Europe. It’s a bad idea, particularly at a time when the United States is struggling to rebuild its relations with its NATO allies.
On good track with Germany, probably less so with France.
Washington is hoping to cut its military presence in Germany — a little more than 70,000 soldiers — roughly in half. Two heavy divisions now based there, and the soldiers’ families, would return to the United States. They would be replaced by a much smaller light combat brigade, while other units would be rotated in and out, at considerable cost, for short-term exercises. The Air Force is also thinking of moving some of its F-16 fighter jets from Germany to Turkey, where they would be closer to Middle East trouble spots but subject to restrictions by the host government.
I suppose we all know what kind of "restrictions" this means. And will this all really come cheaper?
The large American military presence in Germany has long symbolized the understanding at the heart of NATO — Washington’s commitment to remain permanently engaged in Europe’s security and to integrate its military operations with those of its major European allies. Recent history has only reinforced how important that relationship is to the United States. NATO is the only alliance capable of sharing some of the global military burdens that have now overstretched America’s ground forces.
It is not so much about Europe’s security anymore but about global security ensured by a close collaboration between both sides of the Atlantic. Europe may take a bit longer to adapt to the new challenges but it will.
Many Germans, remembering Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s scornful "old Europe" put-downs of their country last year, will see these withdrawals, and the accompanying German job losses, as payback for Berlin’s diplomatic opposition to the invasion of Iraq.
Actually the subject seems to be widely ignored in most parts of Germany except in the regions where U.S. troops are actually stationed. And liked.
Washington denies that. But the Pentagon does seem to have a growing preference for stationing troops either at home or on the territories of allies ready to embrace President Bush’s notions of unilateral preventive war.
That latter is of course nonsense, because it defies the meaning of "unilateral". If other nations "embrace the notions", the thing is not "unilateral" anymore, right? And in Germany the government will change, and the idea of preemption (or prevention) will look much more interesting once Al Qaeda stages its first major attack in Berlin or Frankfurt.
Despite its criticisms of the Iraq war, Germany imposed no restrictions on the use of American bases during that conflict. It continues to deploy thousands of German soldiers to protect those bases, freeing American troops for other uses. Berlin also contributes $1 billion a year to the bases’ support.
I guess you don’t read about this very often in the States?
Economically, the plan to bring the soldiers home is a loser.
Well I don’t have the figures but it’s not all figures here.
The German bases have other advantages as well. They are much closer to the Middle East and Central Asia than bases in the United States and are in a safe country with a stable democracy and the modern conveniences that make life easier for troops on long tours overseas. Soldiers stationed there have access to a variety of training exercises and can enjoy down time with their families. The American military hospital at Ramstein Air Base, the largest outside the United States, provides specialized care for battlefield casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan as it did for those from Bosnia, Kosovo and the U.S.S. Cole.
It would take a lot of time to attain the same standards in say Romania or Bulgaria. I believe though that Ramstein would be the last to go anyway.
There is nothing sacrosanct about maintaining particular Army divisions in Germany. The role of American military forces there has evolved considerably over the decades — from occupying a defeated enemy to deterring Warsaw Pact aggression to symbolizing Washington’s post-cold-war commitment to remain militarily engaged in Europe. Along the way, the size of the American presence has evolved as well. In the nearly 15 years since the Berlin Wall fell, United States force levels in Germany have dropped by roughly 75 percent. Further reductions should not be ruled out. But the Pentagon’s current plans are unduly drastic, unfortunately timed and suspiciously motivated.
I don’t buy the latter. Rumsfeld personally told me that this was not the case. And given his usual "undiplomatic" bluntness, I believe him. I wouldn’t rule out that some people do like the "payback" idea (even on Rantburg). But payback might be a bitch... sometimes for the one who deals it out.
Posted by: True German Ally 2004-06-14
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=35501