In an era of confusion and crisis around the globe, the NATO alliance remains the one consistent pillar of transatlantic unity. That unity is endangered by President Trump’s plan to withdraw 9,500 of the 34,500 American troops currently stationed in Germany by September.
The White House’s decision threatens to weaken European and American security, provoke disputes between allies, encourage Moscow to escalate its aggression toward its Western neighbors, and to ultimately pull America into a more direct confrontation with Russia. Rather than a sound policy decision, the move is driven by Trump’s personal conflicts with Chancellor Angela Merkel and by domestic politics, with Trump seeking to assuage the isolationist elements among his supporters.
Trump believes that Germany has been exploiting the United States for decades. He frequently berates Berlin for failing to abide by NATO agreements that members spend 2% of GDP on national defense, calculating that pulling American troops will prompt Germany to spend more. Such decisions are based on erroneous assumptions about NATO’s missions and operations. Most European states have increased or are committed to increasing their defense spending, while only 5% of the total U.S. defense budget is allocated for European defense.
Aside from funding assurances, it is equally important to calculate how national resources are apportioned for optimal military effectiveness and how the U.S. benefits from its forward presence in Europe. Linking Europe with North America in the shared security pact of NATO not only prevents another war in Europe, but it provides a front-line defense for the U.S. Thirty years after the end of the Cold War, American forces are deployed in Europe, not for the cause of altruism but to protect U.S. interests. This includes detecting, deterring, and defeating adversaries before they feel emboldened to strike against the homeland.
NATO is the key mechanism upholding U.S. geopolitical influence throughout Europe, and it projects that influence into nearby regions, such as the Middle East and the Mediterranean. As the first responder in any major security challenge, NATO monitors all threats to allied interests and has developed a broad arsenal of capabilities for shared military, cyberspace, and counterterrorism efforts.
The U.S. troop presence in Germany has been steadily reduced to about 35,000 personnel from the nearly 300,000 there in the early 1990s. President Vladimir Putin has benefited from the American drawdown by multiplying Russian forces along NATO’s borders. Russia’s benefits are Europe’s threats, demonstrated in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Georgia, its accelerating military buildup, including the militarization of Kaliningrad and occupied Crimea, and its multipronged campaign to destabilize Western democracies. Russia constantly probes the defenses of several European states and has expanded its snap exercises targeting Poland and the Baltic states. It stages frequent provocations against allied airspace and territorial waters, endangering the free movement of commercial traffic in the Black Sea.
Europe is insecure without a resilient NATO umbrella coupled with a formidable U.S. presence. Borders are constantly challenged by a belligerent Russia, constituting the gravest security danger since World War II. The weakening of NATO through an American contraction will entice more intensive Russian aggression. If a new war erupts, the ultimate cost to the U.S. will be far greater than its current investment in forward projection. Washington would not be able to simply isolate itself while its military, political, and economic interests were being crippled.
Janusz Bugajski is a Senior Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) in Washington, D.C. His recent book, co-authored with Margarita Assenova, is entitled Eurasian Disunion: Russia’s Vulnerable Flanks. He has just co-authored a new CEPA report on NATO entitled “One Flank, One Threat, One Presence.”
