Reshaping Washington's global
footprint By David Isenberg
It appears the barbarian hordes will have a few
less Americans to attack in the future, or at least have
to travel to different places to attack them.
That is one of the conclusions to be drawn from
the Bush administration's Global Posture Review, which
was officially released on Monday by President George W
Bush at a speech to the annual convention of the 2.6
million-member Veterans of Foreign Wars in Cincinnati.
The plan involves redeploying US military forces
currently stationed around the world (commonly referred
to as the "global footprint"), and it has been in the
works since August 2001, when Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld set it in motion.
Unlike the plans of
the previous administration, such as the Base Force in
the first Bush administration and Bottom Up Review and
1997 Quadrennial Defense Review during the Bill Clinton
years, this plan is more ambitious in that it doesn't
just adjust overall force levels, it also aims to pull
70,000 to 100,000 troops out of Europe and Asia. If this
really happens it would be the biggest military
reconfiguration since the end of the Cold War.
Currently, more than 100,000 US troops are based
in Europe, about 70% of them in Germany, and another
100,000 in Asia-Pacific. Most of the troops to be moved
from Europe and Asia will return to the US, along with
an estimated 100,000 support staff and family members.
But this is not to say that America plans to
reduce its ability to intervene militarily around the
world. As one military official said, "It's not our view
that this will result in a force structure reduction in
any of the services. That's not what this plan is about.
This really is not just about reductions in place, but
this is about a realignment globally of our forces and
capabilities. And that's been the focus. This is not a
troop cut or a force structure reduction in the armed
forces."
As Bush said:
And so, today I announce a new plan for
deploying America's armed forces. Over the coming
decade, we'll deploy a more agile and more flexible
force, which means that more of our troops will be
stationed and deployed from here at home. We will move
some of our troops and capabilities to new locations,
so they can surge quickly to deal with unexpected
threats. We'll take advantage of 21st century military
technologies to rapidly deploy increased combat power.
In fact, the US will still maintain nearly
190,000 of its 1.4 million troops in foreign postings.
Of course, the devil is in the details and the details
are still fairly vague.
At the Pentagon on
Monday the usual suspects - unnamed senior military
officials - gave a background briefing. Among the few
specifics they offered were that a significant portion
of the redeployed forces will come from Europe. Much of
them will be embedded in the two heavy divisions that
are in Germany. These would be the Army's First Armored
and First Infantry Divisions. But they will also send a
new light armored Stryker Brigade to Germany. The US
Army's V (5th) Corps, headquartered in Heidelberg,
Germany, will be restructured. But there will still be a
very substantial ground presence in Germany when this is
done.
Indeed, the Pentagon will probably rely
even more heavily on transport hubs such as its Ramstein
air base in Germany to ferry troops and equipment from
the US to combat zones. They plan to deploy forces in
accordance with a concept called "global military force
management", which will move away from the old linear
type of deployment where one unit has to arrive in a
theater before the other can come home.
The
officials also noted that a reduction in forces from
Germany will not lessen the US military's capabilities
to deploy globally. They pointed out that in Europe they
have added a battalion to the 173rd Brigade in Vicenza,
Italy and are going to round out that brigade with three
battalions. They also have two F-16 squadrons at Aviano,
Italy. The brigade is a significant combat punch in that
part of the world, which is now able to move quickly to
areas further to the east because it is an airborne
brigade, what Rumsfeld has famously called the "New
Europe".
The Pentagon also plans to rely more on
temporary bases in previously non-allied countries such
as Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. But because future
force levels are dependent on negotiations that are
still ongoing with many other countries, there are other
nations, such as Turkey, where no firm decisions have
been made. The US has two F-16 squadrons in Spangdahlem.
According to one of the officials at the briefing, "For
the moment, that's where they're going to stay,
notwithstanding continuing dialogue with the Turks on
perhaps more flexible use, shall we say, of Incirlik."
Guam is likely to see more forces rotate there
as needed. B-52s and B-2s already use Anderson Air Base
there, and three nuclear submarines are based there.
Countries like Poland and Romania and Uzbekistan will
likely see rotational deployments of US forces but not
like the big numbers that are in Germany today.
They plan to pull about 12,500 of the 37,000 out
of South Korea, at least on a temporary basis. The
3,500-strong army brigade which moved from South Korea
to Iraq this month is not likely to return.
But
at the same time the Pentagon plans to consolidate
troops further to the south in Korea which it feels will
make them much more effective. But they were
noncommittal about whether the current 40,000 troops in
Japan will be reduced. An official at the briefing said,
"I don't want to go into a number here today."
The Pentagon has promised an US$11 billion
modernization plan to upgrade South Korean facilities as
part of efforts to increase its capability, even though
it is reducing troop levels.
Left unanswered was
the question of how this would affect negotiations with
North Korea. Some commentators said the withdrawal of US
forces from South Korea would be giving away a useful
bargaining chip.
One revealing tidbit at the
briefing, for those unfamiliar with the scope of the
global US military basing complex was this:
There are only 230 major US military bases
in the world, 202 of which are in the United States
and its territories. But there are 5,458 [chuckles]
distinct and discrete military installations around
the world, and it wouldn't be a stretch to say that
many of them are 100 acres or less. Again, a legacy
from the Cold War, a legacy from post-1945. We don't
need those little pieces of property
anymore.
A May 2004 Congressional Budget
Office report reviewed global basing options and
concluded that in regard to the cost-effectiveness of
this realignment, the US could eventually save $1
billion a year, but first it would have to invest $7
billion.
David Isenberg, a senior
analyst with the Washington-based British American
Security Information Council (BASIC), has a wide
background in arms control and national security issues.
The views expressed are his own.
(Copyright
2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact content@atimes.com for information
on our sales and syndication policies.)
