|
|||||
|
SHAPE News Summary and Analysis 5 March 2003
GENERAL JONES Media continue to focus on remarks by Gen. Jones in Stuttgart Monday, where he unveiled overhaul plans for U.S. bases in Europe.Dismissing temptations to see a possible redeployment of the U.S. troop presence in Europe toward the East as a retaliation for trans-Atlantic tensions, France’s Le Figaro notes that as early as 2001, Defense Review was advocating the creation of “forward deterrence” to integrate the consequences of the disappearance of the Soviet Union. The daily also observes that last year, the U.S. Defense Secretary pronounced himself in favor of more mobile forces and for a substantial reduction of the cost of their stationing abroad. It concludes that this is probably why Gen. Jones was selected to hold the dual-hat job of SACEUR and chief of U.S. forces in Europe. “The Marine Corps is synonymous to the new mobility,” stresses the newspaper, adding: “Isolated measures had already been taken within NATO, but not within U.S. structures. As an example, last October, the Alliance disbanded a command structure in Heidelberg which was typical of the Cold War era. Clearly, Gen. Jones has been tasked to amplify these ideas as far as U.S. forces are concerned.” Explaining the rationalization effort, the newspaper continues: “The broad lines … are well known. They consist in replacing, at least partly, large barracks dating from a past era as well as … heavy infrastructure.” The newspaper considers, however, that eventually this risks posing three distinct problems. First for countries currently hosting U.S. troops and thus mainly Germany, which hosts the vast majority of the 239 U.S. installations in Europe. “Ramstein airbase, for example, generates a billion euro economic impact for the region and employs 6,000 civilians. Gen. Jones says this base has ‘a durable value’ and its future is not at stake but economic fallbacks will be felt elsewhere,” the article stresses. Second, the newspaper adds, governments of future host countries could be confronted to several problems. Public opinion, for instance, may not necessarily support the re-deployment. And thirdly, Russia, may not see a U.S. deployment near its borders very favorably. The article continues: “In the long term, everything will depend on the Iraqi issue. But already, Gen. Jones is trying to reassure the Kremlin…. Everybody is trying to minimize the issue. It is being stressed that nothing concrete is on the table. However, one or two years from now an imitator of Elvis Presley risks being found not at Friedberg, near Frankfurt, but in Taszar, in Hungary.” Monitoring official reactions in Eastern Europe to Gen. Jones’ remarks, AFP writes that in one of the rare official reactions, Romanian Foreign Minister Geoana said deploying U.S. troops in Eastern Europe would help Romania play a role as a future member of NATO. “If Romania and Bulgaria are seen as important countries from a geopolitical standpoint that would coincide with our analysis about the role that Romania could play as a future member of NATO,” Geoana reportedly said. According to the dispatch, he added that such a change would be a sign of an evolution from the strategy of massive and permanent bases to one of more flexible deployments to “adapt the strategy of NATO to the challenges of the 21st century.” The dispatch also quotes the Hungarian newspaper Nepszabadsag saying there were “Atlantic officials from Brussels” saying the United States is having “extensive talks” with its Eastern European partners on a new network of bases. The dispatch adds that in Warsaw, a Polish Defense Ministry spokesman stressed that talks of moving U.S. military bases to Poland were “pure speculation.” NATO
ESDP
IRAQ
|
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
