US troops abroad

A sign of growing isolationism or a reorganisation of US military power projection? An affirmation of Pax Americana's success…

A sign of growing isolationism or a reorganisation of US military power projection? An affirmation of Pax Americana's success or a response to growing anti-Americanism? An electoral ploy or a timely shift to more flexible deployment?

Such questions are posed by President Bush's announcement that 70,000 United States troops (one third of the total involved) are to be withdrawn from overseas over the next 10 years and stationed at home. The figures relate to permanent postings, mostly in Germany, South Korea and Japan and not to the 125,000 currently in Iraq and 20,000 in Afghanistan.

Mr Bush gave precious few details of how the redeployments will work when he made the announcement at a veterans rally in the swing state of Ohio on Monday. "The world has changed a great deal and our posture must change with it," he told them. "Our service members will have more time on the home front and more predictability and fewer moves over a career." This combines historical judgment and shrewd campaigning in equal measure. Neither should be overlooked in evaluating what is undoubtedly a significant policy development.

The Cold War deployments of US troops in Germany and elsewhere in Europe have become increasingly redundant after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union. NATO's future and purpose remain uncertain, as do transatlantic relations which have yet to adjust fully to these changes. Europeans are thereby faced with taking more responsibility for their own security. Nonetheless, some US troops are to be redeployed from Germany to Romania and Bulgaria and others will remain in the Balkans and in Britain. So without the details it is not possible to make a definitive judgment about the overall strategy in Europe.

READ MORE

The same applies to US troop withdrawals from Asia. Reaction in South Korea, as in Germany, is driven in part by the shock to local communities which will lose employment when bases close - and by suspicions that the decisions reflect the Bush administration's attitude to criticisms of their policies on Iraq and North Korea. Experts do not believe it will be possible to find many troops available for withdrawal among the 90,000 US personnel deployed in East Asia, including Japan, Australia and Singapore, if the US remains committed to its strategic role there - which nobody seriously doubts it does.

That this is more a rationalisation of US superpower priorities than a withdrawal from military engagement seems clear from its increasing military presence in the Middle East and central Asia. US electoral politics concern the tactics and scale, not the substance, of its power.