Read on Twitter
"The plan to pull US troops from the long-time NATO ally has been met with broad bipartisan opposition amid concerns that it will weaken the US military's position vis a vis Russia, however the Trump Administration has decided to proceed with the move." 1/ (of 15) https://twitter.com/fpleitgenCNN/status/1288464373141450752
Having just watched the SecDef, Vice CJCS and @US_EUCOM Commander, I am sickened by this decision and explanation.
It is not tied to any strategic advantage, and in fact is counterproductive to showing strength in Europe.
A couple things:
2/
It is not tied to any strategic advantage, and in fact is counterproductive to showing strength in Europe.
A couple things:
2/
First, what is obvious to me - having served 12 years in Germany and having participated in the last force structure change from 2004-2011, this is not a "strategic" move...it is specifically a directed personal insult from Trump to our great & very supportive ally Germany.
3/
3/
The Headquarters in Stuttgart - both EUCOM and AFRICOM - will take billions of dollars to move, and will disrupt those HQs in their operation. AFRICOM location is "to be determined" because there is no valid answer...consolidating EUCOM w SHAPE in Belgium will be challenging. 4/
As GEN Hyten stated, this will cost more than "a few billion" dollars. During the last force posture change in 2004-2011, billions of dollars were spent to secure and consolidate key locations in Germany...upgrades in base housing, schools, support facilities, HQs, barracks.
5/
5/
Similar facilities - barracks, motor pools, logistics facilities, airfields, railheads - are now required in the areas where rotational troops will deploy. That will cost billions.
One lesson we learned..."rotational forces are more expensive & they don't built trust."
One lesson we learned..."rotational forces are more expensive & they don't built trust."
Rotational troops will now require more time away from their families...a key moral issue.
Rotational troops do deploy in increased readiness state, because they spend time at training centers preparing for rotation. More time away from families.
Rotational troops do deploy in increased readiness state, because they spend time at training centers preparing for rotation. More time away from families.
The 2d Stryker Brigade is at Vilseck, a great transport hub for that mobile unit to transit to ANY area (Baltics, Caucasus, Nordic, Poland, etc). They have been doing this for over a decade. Their families are cared for at Vilseck, and time away from families is less.
6/
6/
That training location(within Grafenwoehr, Bavaria) is also a world-class training location for all of NATO and the US. Forces train there, together. This kind of "allied training" not done anywhere in the US Without US troops, it will be hard to maintain that center.
7/
7/
When I commanded at Grafenwoehr as a 1-star, that based was transformed. Over a billion dollars in construction costs for barracks, motor pools, family housing. That was in 2004-6.
8/
8/
Not sure of other Army forces moving out of Germany, but it seems like several large ones. Aviation in Ansbach (move to Belgium, as stated by GEN Wolters?), likely logistics, intel & US Army Europe Headquarters? Many brand new facilities, with a large/new command facility.
9/
9/
BTW, many of the requirements for "new facilites" are the same facilities that were raided of funds when the "border wall efforts" needed funds. It's interesting that those funds were for upgrades for servicability but they will now require more funds for construction.
10/
10/
The move of aircraft from UK to Germany was smart. Moving other USAF units from Germany to Italy doesn't make strategic or operational sense. Italy's flight restrictions & civilian workforce much more challenging to work with than Germany's, and again...more new costs.
11/
11/
Having had to notify families, move units and equipment, and go through the redeployment process will - as GEN Wolters said - take months and years, not weeks.
It is disruptive, and affects readiness...especially when this is all happening without a previous plan. 12/
It is disruptive, and affects readiness...especially when this is all happening without a previous plan. 12/
A couple final comments.
SecDef Esper's statement that he "knows" what it's like because he used to serve in Germany in the 80's is disingenuous. I served in Germany in the 70's, 80's, 90's and first decade of 2000. NATO and forces in Europe aren not how he remembers it.
13/
SecDef Esper's statement that he "knows" what it's like because he used to serve in Germany in the 80's is disingenuous. I served in Germany in the 70's, 80's, 90's and first decade of 2000. NATO and forces in Europe aren not how he remembers it.
13/
2d, these actions are primarily:
1. Punishing Merkel & Germany
2. Knee-jerk reaction to Trump vs collaborative US strategy
3. A gift to Russian expansionism & Putin's plan
4. Another wedge for NATO
5. Further disruption of US Military
6. Something Congress should not allow
14/
1. Punishing Merkel & Germany
2. Knee-jerk reaction to Trump vs collaborative US strategy
3. A gift to Russian expansionism & Putin's plan
4. Another wedge for NATO
5. Further disruption of US Military
6. Something Congress should not allow
14/
According to GENs Hyten & Wolters, they will continue to "develop the plan."
It will take months to plan, years to execute.
Congress must see this for what it is, and stop it. 15/15
It will take months to plan, years to execute.
Congress must see this for what it is, and stop it. 15/15
