Defense Secretary Esper Says U.S. Plans To Cut Troops In Germany By A Third

In a slap at a longtime ally frequently reviled by President Trump, Defense Secretary Mark Esper announced Wednesday that the U.S. plans to withdraw roughly a third of the 36,000 American forces stationed in Germany. Nearly 5,600 of the 11,800 troops to be removed from Germany would be sent to other NATO allies in Europe, including Poland. Another 6,400 would return to the U.S., although they or similar units would be redeployed to other European countries on what Esper described as a "rotational" basis. "Our aim is to implement these moves as. "We could see some moves begin within weeks; others will take longer." The Pentagon chief cast the decision to cut U.S. forces in Germany as the result of a months-long review of American deployments in Europe aimed at bolstering defense. "These changes will achieve the core principles of enhancing U.S. and NATO deterrence of Russia, strengthening NATO, reassuring allies and improving U.S. strategic flexibility," Esper said, even as he made clear that the repositioning of U.S. forces remains tentative. "I want to note that this plan is subject to and likely will change to some degree as it evolves over time." Trump, for his part, the troop drawdown as a reprisal for what the American president considers to be a refusal by Germany to spend a greater share of its gross domestic product on defense. Asked at the Pentagon whether the troop reduction was Trump "basically sticking it to Germany," Esper said the president had simply "accelerated" the decision to draw down forces there.Reaction to the move has been decidedly mixed."I believe the concept for realigning U.S. military posture in Europe, as the President has approved, is sound," Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., despite noting that any changes may be slow in coming. "It is clear to me that this concept will take months to plan, and years to execute.""U.S. troops aren't stationed around the world as traffic cops or welfare caseworkers – they're restraining the expansionary aims of the world's worst regimes, chiefly China and Russia," Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., a member of the upper chamber's intelligence committee, said in a . "The President's lack of strategic understanding of this issue increases our response time and hinders the important deterrent work our servicemen and women are doing. Maintaining forward presence is cheaper for our taxpayers and safer for our troops.""It undermines the credibility of the NATO alliance, it calls into question our commitment to our NATO allies," Van Hollen said. "This is exactly the kind of thing that will cause Vladimir Putin to pop his champagne or vodka bottles in Moscow.""The forward stationing of American troops since the end of World War II has helped to prevent another world war and, most importantly, has helped make America safer," the GOP lawmakers wrote in a letter signed by the panel's ranking member, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. "In Europe, the threats posed by Russia have not lessened, and we believe that signs of a weakened U.S. commitment to NATO will encourage further Russian aggression and opportunism."