General Mark A. Milley, Chief of General Staff, said Tuesday that he was in favor of establishing permanent bases for US troops in the area, but for the deployment of personnel there on a rotating basis, “so you will have the result of permanence.” lower costs because it does not include expenses such as family housing and schools. “I believe that many of our allies, especially those in the Baltic, Poland or Romania, are very willing to establish a permanent basis,” Milley said in a statement to the House Armed Services Committee. “They will build them and pay for them.” Speaking to the same committee last week, Air Force General Todd Wolters, who heads the US European Command, said NATO’s existing policy of exchanging troops through Eastern Europe “must change” and that the countries there “are very willing”. to permanently take over NATO forces. The high-level talks come as Russian forces have been hampered in their bid to seize most of Ukraine’s major cities, including the capital, Kiev. As a result, US officials have said that Russian President Vladimir Putin is reviewing his goals in order to shed more combat power in eastern Ukraine. In the quagmire of Putin’s Ukraine, the echoes of the Soviet failure in Afghanistan The Pentagon has drastically increased the number of US troops in Europe from about 60,000 to more than 100,000 as a result of Russia’s military build-up around Ukraine and the ensuing invasion. At the height of the Cold War in the 1950s, the US military presence throughout Europe was over 400,000. Senior U.S. defense officials have been cautious in describing the path they will follow, describing the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a generational event that has upset the world order. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said last week that the United States would consult with its allies “at the right time” to decide on the right security position in Europe, “regardless of how the war ends.” The Biden government is open to discussing whether there needs to be a “greater permanent presence”. On Tuesday, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said the issue was likely to be raised at a NATO summit in June. “Our goal,” Austin said, “is to ensure that we continue to reassure our allies and partners, especially those on the east side, and especially our Baltic allies in the Baltic region.” The debate is complicated by US assessments that China, not Russia, is the most important long-term concern for US security. A senior US defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the Pentagon’s plan, said in an interview that “there will be a change of attitude in Europe” as a result of the war in Ukraine and “some of these may include the presence of of the United States. ” But Eastern Europe will also be reinforced by troops from other NATO nations who are estimating what will be needed to deter Russia in the coming months and years, the official said. “Right now, I think we will be able to walk and chew gum at the same time and make the Indo-Pacific theater a priority, while we understand that we need to … grow a little bit in Europe,” the official said. Russia’s failures in Ukraine infuse the Pentagon with new confidence Elbridge Colby, a former defense official in the Trump administration, said it was a “really serious concern” what could be the trend line for maintaining additional forces in Europe as a result of the Russian invasion, saying the United States was “going badly from view of the military balance in Asia “. While the Pentagon has relied heavily on the U.S. military to boost security in Eastern Europe and would likely rely on the Navy and Pacific Air Force, there is more overlap than people realize, Colby said. The 82nd Airborne Division, which has thousands of troops deployed in Poland, requires air support and other high capabilities needed elsewhere, he said. “I honestly think the president has this idea: ‘We are America. “We can do anything,” Colby told President Biden. “But there are very real and immediate limitations. “We have to face them and adapt, not ignore them.” The United States is “not exactly where” it might decide to set up a new base or bases in Eastern Europe, but the issue is clearly “in the air,” said Jim Townsend, a former Obama administration official studying security. NATO. issues. Following Russia’s 2014 invasion and annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, US defense officials have been scrutinizing whether to deploy permanent US troops in Eastern Europe, Townsend said. The idea, which had significant costs, was eventually tabled, but recent events could change that thinking, he said. “We are in a different day and season now,” Townsend said. “I think we need them there.” While the Pentagon may not want to build permanent US forces in Eastern Europe, given its concerns about China, it will be increasingly difficult to withdraw them due to external pressure from allies and internal pressure from supporters who believe there is a greater US A military presence in Europe is needed, said Rachel Rizzo, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Europe Center. “The advantage is that the Eastern allies would be increasingly reassured,” Rizzo said. “The downside is that we could go back to a scenario where there is just a huge number of American troops on the European continent again. “We are not there yet, but it’s something we have to think about.” Karoun Demirjian and Greg Jaffe contributed to this report.
