NATO Is Strong: Is It Time for the U.S. to Reduce Its Military Presence in Europe?

Abstract: Sweden’s latest admission to NATO has bolstered the alliance, providing the U.S. extra strategic flexibility in Europe. Amidst broader international engagements, together with crises within the Center East and strategic pivots to Asia, there’s rising home scrutiny of U.S. involvement abroad. With NATO’s strengthened presence in Europe, notably by way of the addition of Sweden and Finland, and the potential of European allies, the U.S. is positioned to cut back its army footprint in Europe with out compromising regional safety. This might encourage European nations to imagine higher accountability for his or her protection, particularly these not assembly NATO’s spending targets, whereas permitting the U.S. to reallocate sources to different international priorities.

America Wants a Lighter Army Footprint in Europe

This March, Sweden was lastly admitted to NATO, overcoming delays from Turkey and Hungary. The “NATO Lake” has come to fruition and america ought to act prefer it. On the similar time, the US is coping with a disaster within the Center East, in addition to pivoting to Asia. All of that is within the face of rising public questioning over our entanglements overseas when we’ve got points at residence to face. For the reason that US has greater priorities elsewhere, it’s time for the US to tug again from Europe and encourage our NATO allies to tackle extra of the burden of European protection.

It’s logical to query a pullback with Ukraine nonetheless preventing Russia. Nonetheless, America doesn’t want to thoroughly pull out of Europe; a discount in forces eases the US burden with out endangering our allies. Sweden and Finland changing into NATO members has strengthened the alliance’s place, granting Washington much more flexibility within the area. Each Sweden and Finland have lately signed offers granting the US unrestricted entry to bases. We have now entry to 17 bases in Sweden, 15 in Finland, and have comparable offers with Norway and Denmark. We have now the flexibleness to position extra US property nearer to Russia if we have to sooner or later. To be clear, that may be extremely antagonistic and we must always not achieve this now, however the possibility can’t be discounted.

Particularly with our stronger place within the Nordic area, the US is in a safer place to shift a number of the burden to our European companions. Whereas NATO companions have elevated their protection spending to the purpose the place 18 meet the rule for 2024 (up from simply 3 in 2014), there stay many rich and succesful European nations that aren’t contributing to the extent they’re ready. Some examples of rich NATO nations that didn’t meet this goal in 2023 embrace: Germany, Belgium, Denmark, and Norway. That is effectively after the invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Pulling again from Europe could persuade these nations to take extra accountability for their very own protection.

Whereas some NATO members haven’t hit their 2% GDP spending objective, and must be pressured by the US to take action, we must always acknowledge the NATO nations which have taken possession of their protection. International locations corresponding to Finland, Sweden, and Poland all meet the goal spending and have demonstrated their dedication to proceed. France can be price mentioning; they’re anticipated to satisfy the two% GDP objective for 2024 and have elevated spending accordingly. President Macron has lately been flirting with the thought of sending French troops to Ukraine and, whereas this highlights French functionality, Washington must also be clear that we are going to not observe them into Ukraine. Committing our troops in that type of method can be reckless and threat a broader warfare.

With many NATO nations, together with the 2 latest members, demonstrating that they take their protection significantly, the US ought to transfer troops from nations not assembly their obligation to those who do. This must also contain drawing down the general quantity. Given the truth that Russia is slowed down in Ukraine and given our enviable safety at residence, we must always think about whether or not we really want ~50,000 Individuals in Germany alone. The variety of troops or property we place someplace can be not an ideal correlation to our energy. For instance, Finland lies not simply close to St. Petersburg, however borders the Murmansk Oblast, which hosts Russia’s Northern Fleet, its largest. Murmansk Oblast additionally hosts the majority of Russia’s nuclear bomber fleet, which is related to the remainder of Russia by a single weak highway/rail hall. Positioning a comparatively small drive of NATO troops right here, who needn’t be American troops, might make far more affect within the occasion of battle versus from Rammstein which is 1,000 miles away from Russia’s foremost border.

This isn’t to say that the US ought to fully take away forces from Germany, Italy, and so forth. Bases corresponding to Rammstein stay vital as a stopover level for operations within the Center East for instance. However with our new flexibilities and energy projection choices, we will afford to convey residence the forces we despatched because the invasion of Ukraine. Given Russia’s diminished standard army may, we will seemingly scale back our presence even additional and have flexibility to position forces in different theaters or convey them residence fully.

The US has a chance to take care of its energy in Europe, release forces for potential battle within the Indo-Pacific, and produce troops residence. This chance additionally shifts a number of the protection burden to European companions. Along with the equity facet of European nations sharing the burden, it additionally strengthens NATO as a complete. We should always take this chance and urge policymakers to take action.