Reduction of the US Armed Forces in Germany

Myths and Reality

 

Victor Hvozd
Doctor of Military Sciences

 

In June this year US President D. Trump made another statement of intent to reduce the US military presence in Germany. The confirmation of such plans, which were announced by D. Trump at the beginning of his presidential term in 2017, caused a wide resonance in the United States, Europe and Russia, and, of course, in Ukraine. And this is quite understandable given the geopolitical interests of the parties and disagreements between them. They are well known and do not require further analysys. I will only say that such interests and contradictions determine the different assessments of D. Trump’s statements on Euro-Atlantic security. At this, opinions on the issue are fundamentally different, even in the United States itself, not to mention other countries.

 

…D. Trump’s speeches are purely political and are aimed at raising his rating on the eve of the 2020 US presidential election. Similarly should be seen D. Trump’s “flirtation” with Russia…

Thus, part of the American society supports D. Trump’s statement about the USA’s excessive spending on European security and the need to increase the contribution by European countries. In fact, it is this part of the American electorate that is target of D. Trump’s statements about the expediency of reducing the number of the US troops in Germany and directing the released funds to resolve socio-economic problems of the United States. In this regard, such speeches by D. Trump are purely political and are aimed at raising his rating on the eve of the 2020 US presidential election. Similarly should be seen D. Trump’s “flirtation” with Russia, which aimed at justifying or at least giving an impression of the objectivity of his decision to reduce US troops in Germany and in Europe in general.

Besides, D. Trump’s special goal is to put pressure on the leadership of Germany and other European countries on certain issues that are contrary to American and his personal interests. In particular, this concerns Germany’s support for Russia’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project and the European NATO members’ delay in increasing their military spending. With this in mind, D. Trump is actually intimidating them with the Russian military threat, despite the fact that it contradicts his own “flirtation” with Moscow. This explains US President D. Trump’s and German Chancellor A. Merkel’s (who is the de facto leader of Europe and has the strongest positions in defending European interests) mutual negative attitudes.

At this, D. Trump’s policy toward Europe does not have unanimous support in the United States. For example, it has been harshly criticized by the US Democratic Party and condemned by many American politicians and citizens who support Washington’s commitment to its European partners. The possibility of the United States’ violating such commitments is a major concern in Europe. The reaction of the European community to this issue also includes a wide range of assessments and opinions, including of the opposite and speculative nature.

…In fact, everyone understands Europe’s being incapable of defending itself against possible armed aggression by Russia…

Some European politicians claim that Europe has been betrayed by the United States. Again, different conclusions are drawn from this depending on the interests of certain political forces and their vision of the situation. In particular, according to the representatives of the leadership of Germany and a number of other countries, D. Trump’s attitude to Europe requires intensification of its own efforts to strengthen European security. In this regard, it is proposed to deepen the cooperation of the EU member states in the military sphere, including creation of its own European army as part of NATO, or a separate independent structure. However, the demonstration of such intentions by European politicians is mostly aimed at raising their ratings among the electorate of their countries, or exerting pressure on the United States by warning about a threat of a critical weakening of American positions in Europe. In fact, everyone understands Europe’s being incapable of defending itself against possible armed aggression by Russia.

This fact is used by other politicians, in particular, President of France E. Macron to justify the need to resume full cooperation with Russia. According to his repeated statements, the United States has left Europe alone with Russia, which leaves European countries with no choice but to meet Moscow halfway. Citing the same reasons, Eurosceptic, pro-Russian, nationalist and left-wing parties in European countries have made similar appeals. Moreover, they not only support D. Trump’s intentions to reduce the US military presence in Germany, but also demand the US Armed Forces’ complete withdrawal from Europe.

Absolutely different are positions of Poland and the Baltic states, who are at the forefront of military threats from Russia. Of course, these countries are concerned about the USA’s intentions to reduce the number of American troops in Europe. At the same time, they support plans to redeploy US troops to their territories, which is an additional deterrent to the Russian Federation. Romania and the rest of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have similar interests, which could also be targets to Moscow’s aggression.

 

Quite revealing is the reaction by Russia, which considers the US military presence in Europe to be one of the main threats to its security and interests. Based on this, at the political level, the Russian leadership approves of D. Trump’s intentions to reduce the number of US troops in Germany. At the same time, Moscow has a clear understanding that such D. Trump’s plans will in no way weaken NATO and, consequently, will not allow Russia to intensify its expansion in Europe. Especially with the USA’s deploying new units and formations of its troops in the CEE and Baltic countries.

Given these prospects, Moscow accuses the United States of undermining European security and threatens to retaliate. Among other things, to continue strengthening the Russian troops on the Western direction and to begin to deploy against NATO countries new modernized Iskander-M long-range missile systems, capable of “covering” the whole of Europe.

…D. Trump’s plans is being used by Russia as an excuse to conduct another information campaign to undermine Euro-Atlantic unity…

At the same time, D. Trump’s plans is being used by Russia as an excuse to conduct another information campaign to undermine Euro-Atlantic unity. In particular, it states that the United States neglects the security interests of Europe, while D. Trump pursues selfish national policy.

In a way, such statements by Moscow, which coincide with similar insinuations of the above-mentioned forces in Europe, are aimed at discrediting the ideas of Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration. Unfortunately, such insinuations are supported by a number of Ukrainian experts who do not understand the situation or fulfill relevant political orders. Given this, I would like to show the true picture of what is happening in the field of Euro-Atlantic security, including in the context of the redeployment of US troops and the EU member states’ own actions to strengthen European security. Last year I touched on this topic, but changes in the situation and the relevance of the issues raised need to return to it. So what can be said about this?

 

Firstly. As noted above, D. Trump’s decision to reduce the number of US troops in Europe is still purely political (pre-election) in nature and cannot be implemented right now. To begin with, it needs to be approved by the US Congress, and requires deployment of the infrastructure to house military units coming from Europe. All these are quite complex and time consuming procedures that need additional financial resources. Besides, quite probable is D. Trump’s losing the US presidential election in November this year. Therefore, his decisions may be reconsidered by the new President, especially if it will be J. Biden.

 

US military installations in Germany

Secondly. Redeployment of some US troops from Germany to Poland and the Baltic states is fully justified from an operational and strategic point of view. During the last Cold War, American troops, stationed in what was then the FRG, were at the forefront of the confrontation with the armed forces of the USSR and its Warsaw Pact allies.

Today, such a line runs along the border between Poland/the Baltic states and Russia. As a result, Germany has moved from the first to the second echelon of NATO on the Eastern direction. Therefore, it is quite logical to deploy the main contingent of the US Armed Forces in Europe exactly in Poland and the Baltic states, not in Germany.

At this, the headquarters of the United States European Command will remain in Germany (Stuttgart), and lower-level headquarters and combat units will be deployed in Poland and the Baltic states. In particular, according to some sources, it is planned to locate in Poland the headquarters of the V Corps of the US Army, which has been in Germany since the end of World War II. In June 2013, the V Corps was formally inactivated, but it was officially restored in February 2020.

Besides, there are already in Poland: the US Army’s Infantry Division Headquarters (Forward) in Poznan (in 2017 it was transferred from Baumholder in Germany); Armored Brigade Combat Team and Combat Aviation Brigade of the US Armed Forces (located on a rotating basis in the area of Powidz); the Joint Force Training Center (Drawsko Pomorskie training ground); the Operations Group Detachment of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) MQ-9 Reaper (Lask or Miroslawiec air bases); a number of other American units. The Armored Brigade Combat Team of the US Army has been deployed in Lithuania at a military training ground near Pabrade (10 km from the border with Belarus).

Besides, a number of other US military facilities are being planned or are being built in Poland, including: infrastructure for the full-scale deployment of divisional-level units; warehouses and storage facilities (in particular, a warehouse of military equipment in the area of Powidz for the Armored Brigade Combat Team); new runway, hangars and technical buildings at the Copernicus Airport Wroclaw to receive heavy military transport aircrafts. With the participation of American and Polish troops near the town of Orzysz in the Warmian-Masurian Voivodeship, an Enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) Battlegroup is being created to protect the strategically important Suwalki Gap (Corridor).

US/NATO military presence in Poland

It is significant that the decisions on these issues were made during the meeting of the Presidents of the USA D. Trump and of Poland — A. Duda on June 24 this year — on the day of large-scale military parades in Russia, aimed at demonstrating Russia’s military power.

 

Thirdly. The reduction in the number of US troops in Germany (if any) is offset by the creation of a NATO’s Rapid Deployable Corps, as well as the resumption of a system for the rapid deployment of US troops from the USA’s mainland to Europe.

To date, on the West-Eastern direction in the Baltic region the Multinational Corps Northeast (MNC-NE) has already established with headquarters in Poland (Szczecin). The units of the Corps are located in Poland and the Baltic states and can be quickly reinforced by the contingents of the German and Danish troops. The possibility of creating a similar Rapid Deployable Corps on the South-Eastern direction in the Black Sea region is not ruled out.

…In fact, NATO’s military potential today outweigh Russia’s military capabilities. This fact is openly acknowledged by Moscow…

At the same time, two new command structures have been created for the European theatre of operation in Norfolk (USA) and Ulm (Germany) to ensure the deployment of US troops to Europe as part of measures to increase NATO’s operational capabilities. In 2018, the US Navy’s Second Fleet in the Atlantic Ocean was officially restored with the task of deterring Russia in the North Atlantic and the Baltic region, and ensuring the rapid deployment of the US troops to Europe in case of a military conflict at the European theatre.

European airfields, seaports and railways are also being modernized to improve their capacity to receive and relocate US troops to operational areas.

All these issues are systematically addressed during military exercises of the US Armed Forces and NATO Allies such as Atlantic Resolve and Defender Europe.

 

Fourthly. Against the background of D. Trump’s intentions to reduce American troops in Germany, the United States is steadily increasing its military activity on the main directions of collision of its interests with Russia. In particular, this concerns sending US warships and naval groups to the Baltic and Black Seas, which actually patrol there on a permanent basis. In addition, US strategic and reconnaissance aviation conducts systematic flights in the Baltic and Black Sea regions.

US and British warships conduct joint operation in the Barents Sea

In May this year, the US Navy guided-missile destroyers USS Roosevelt, USS Porter, USS Donald Cook and the British frigate HMS Kent entered the Barents Sea for the first time in 30 years for the official purpose of the operation to ensure maritime security and demonstrate freedom of navigation. This poses a direct threat to Russia, because it is in this region were the main naval bases of the RF Northern Fleet, including places of deployment and combat duty of its nuclear submarines.

Besides, according to German media reports, following the video conference (June 17–18 this year) of NATO Defense Ministers, a new concept of countering Russia in the nuclear sphere was agreed upon. In particular, it is planned to deploy American medium-range missiles in Europe, which can be equipped with nuclear warheads in case of an aggravation of the situation.

 

Fifthly. The EU member states do implement a number of their own military programs under the EU’s Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP). They mainly concern increasing the European Union’s contribution to international peace and stability, and deepening cooperation between the member states in crisis and conflict response. However, they are in no way aimed at creating any alternatives to NATO and only complement its activities in a number of spheres.

One of them is the creation of joint units (including EU Battlegroups, naval forces, etc.), designed to participate in:

  • peacekeeping, stabilization, counter-terrorism and anti-piracy operations;
  • liquidation of consequences of natural disasters, ecological and technogenic catastrophes;
  • taking emergency measures to counter Russia’s provocations, which can be used by it as an excuse to launch an armed aggression against the CEE countries and the Baltic states.
The current EU mission and operations

Examples of such joint units are the Visegrad Battlegroup, the Multinational Peacekeeping Brigade of Poland, Lithuania and Ukraine (LITPOLUKRBRIG), and the EU Naval Force — Somalia, which is conducting the ATALANTA anti-piracy operation in the western Indian Ocean.

However, as noted above, despite the statements of some European politicians, there are no real plans to create a separate European army from NATO.

 

…The above-mentioned circumstances do not affect the process and prospects of Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration. Evidence of this is the continuation of all programs in this sphere, which do not undergo any changes…

All this not only does not weaken, but, on the contrary, strengthens the capabilities of NATO Allies to deter Russia and repulse its possible armed aggression. In fact, NATO’s military potential today outweigh Russia’s military capabilities. This fact is openly acknowledged by Moscow. Moreover, along with demonstrations of military force, Russia is making proposals to the United States/NATO on mutual reduction of military activity in Europe. The reason for this is Russia’s economic problems, which make it reduce military spending.

Against this background, D. Trump’s policy, which complicates relations between the United States and Europe, really creates challenges to the unity of the Western world. At the same time, it does not in fact hinder the implementation of US/NATO plans to strengthen Europe’s security on the Eastern direction.

…The mutual build-up of Russia and US/NATO troops in the Baltic and Black Sea regions is exacerbating the military-political situation in Europe and around Ukraine…

Under the above-mentioned circumstances, the problems associated with D. Trump’s actions, do not affect the process and prospects of Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration. Evidence of this is the continuation of all programs in this sphere, which do not undergo any changes.

At the same time, the mutual build-up of Russia and US/NATO troops on the main directions of collision of its interests in the Baltic and Black Sea regions is exacerbating the military-political situation in Europe and around Ukraine, which increases the risk of armed conflicts with unpredictable consequences.

 

Схожі публікації