Dem
47
GOP
53
Donald Trump has decided to pull 5,000 American troops to punish German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for not joining the war in Iran. This is the international version of indicting Trump's domestic enemies or endorsing their political opponents. The model is the same everywhere: Anyone who does not submit to Trump's will gets punished, only the mechanisms differ depending on who it is.
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (ret.) was the commander of the U.S. Army in Europe during the 2010s and actually understands the reasons the U.S. has troops in Europe and the consequences of removing them (on a whim, to punish a foreign leader). He wrote an opinion piece for The Bulwark, where he is a contributor, about Trump's move. The title is "The Last Time We Reduced Troops in Europe, a War Broke Out." That summarizes the piece very concisely. Here is a bit longer summary.
When Hertling was commander of U.S. forces in Europe in 2012, officials in the Obama administration ordered the removal of two brigades (7,000 soldiers) from Europe as a strategic move to pivot the Army's focus to Asia and a potential war over Taiwan. It was a well-thought-out, carefully prepared move. Hertling strongly disagreed with his superiors and advised them not to do it, but in the end, they decided to do it anyway and he obeyed orders and carried it out. Russian President Vladimir Putin took the withdrawal as a sign that the U.S. had little interest in Europe. On Feb. 20, 2014, the Russian army invaded Crimea and eastern Ukraine and still holds that territory. In 2022, Putin tried to take the rest of Ukraine, resulting in a war that has been going on for 4 years now and shows no sign of ending.
Hertling still blames himself for not making a better case to his superiors. And he thinks Trump's move will be an even bigger debacle, in part because the drawdown he (Hertling) managed was meticulously planned with strategic choices carefully evaluated. It took years of analysis, coordination with European governments, and consideration of military, political, legal and economic consequences. It was not done on one man's whim to try to force a foreign leader to bend to his will.. This time there is no planning at all and no thought about the consequences. It is sort of like just deciding to bomb some country without thinking about any of the (easily predictable) consequences or having any end game.
Hertling goes on to explain what the U.S. troops in Germany (and elsewhere in Europe) do. They are not sitting around eating schnitzel and drinking beer. Air Force units are constantly flying to practice rapid response across multiple fronts. Naval forces in Spain and Italy provide maritime security. The Marine Corps is constantly training for rapid deployment to various hot spots. Special Operations Forces are actively searching for terrorists. Cybersecurity personnel are working on passive and active security for command-and-control networks. Logistics personnel are making sure that equipment, fuel and supplies are maintained and ready for war where they might be needed. There are critical intelligence centers, logistics hubs and maintenance facilities in Germany that underpin global operations. Just ripping out 5,000 troops with no planning who is leaving and how the system will be readjusted will greatly degrade U.S. strategic power.
Of course, if the U.S. no longer aspires to being a world power and merely wants to be a regional bully pushing around weak countries in Latin America, maybe it doesn't matter. But if the bases and readiness in Europe are degraded, fighting a war in the Middle East will be exponentially more difficult If Putin, once again emboldened by the withdrawal from Germany, decided to invade Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the U.A.E. to seize their oil, without bases all over Europe, the U.S. would be powerless to stop such an invasion. Then a (future) U.S. president wouldn't have any cards.
Hertling's main point is that the real purpose of U.S. troops in Europe is not so much to protect Europe, but to project U.S. power over a large part of the world and make fighting a war there possible if Congress and the president should decide it is necessary. Giving that up because the president is having a temper tantrum is unbelievably foolish and against U.S. interests.
Two top Republicans are very upset with Trump's move. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a joint statement beginning: "We are very concerned by the decision to withdraw a U.S. brigade from Germany." They go on to note that Europe is rapidly rearming and will spend more on defense, but pulling out U.S. troops before European defense has been fully ramped up is "sending the wrong signal to Vladimir Putin." This is exactly what Hertling said. Furthermore, the statement goes on to say that any drawdown needs to be carefully coordinated with Congress and the United States' allies. In other words, this is not something to be done in a fit of presidential pique because someone hurt his feefees. (V)