Posted on 03/10/2019 7:12:48 PM PDT by Steve Schulin
[photo caption] M1A2 Abrams tanks and Bradley Fighting Vehicles converge on a smoke signal during a live-fire exercise at Grafenwoehr, Germany, in March. President Trump is pushing a plan that demands allies pick up the full cost of hosting U.S. troops in their countries, plus a 50 percent premium for American protection, according to a news report. [photo credit; MARTIN EGNASH/STARS AND STRIPES]
STUTTGART, Germany — President Donald Trump is pushing a plan that demands allies pick up the full cost of hosting U.S. troops in their countries, plus a 50 percent premium for the privilege of American protection, according to a news report.
Called “Cost Plus 50,” the plan would cost five or six times more for countries like Germany, Japan and South Korea, Bloomberg news reported Friday.
Trump has been championing the idea for months, Bloomberg reported, citing about a dozen unnamed administration officials. Trump even tested the idea during recent negotiations over a cost sharing agreement with South Korea, which was on the brink of collapse before a deal was finally reached in February.
“We want cost plus 50,” Trump demanded at one point during the talks, as quoted by the media organization.
While the U.S. eventually backed off the demand, the idea hasn’t gone away and could be used to pressure allies to increase their own defense budgets. For two years, Trump has railed against allies, especially in Europe, who Trump has described as security free riders unwilling to pay for their own defense.
[photo caption] A C-17 Globemaster III takes off from Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany. President Trump is pushing a plan that would demand allies like Germany and Japan pick up the full cost of hosting U.S. troops in their countries, plus a 50 percent premium for American protection, according to a news report. [photo credit: MICHAEL ABRAMS/STARS AND STRIPES]
It isn’t clear how close the Cost Plus 50 idea is to becoming official U.S. policy. Bloomberg reported that Trump’s advisers have pushed back against the idea. But the president’s interest in the proposal has nonetheless sent “shock waves through the departments of Defense and State,” it reported.
The plan would likely face fierce resistance from U.S. allies, especially Germany, which hosts about 32,000 American troops. Unlike South Korea, which relies on a large military presence as a line of protection against the north, the American forces in Germany don’t serve as territorial guardians.
While there were some 300,000 troops in Europe during the Cold War, there are about 70,000 in total on the Continent today. The contingent in Germany consists mostly of enabling forces and headquarters. The Army has just one infantry brigade in the country.
While allies like Japan see the U.S. military presence as a bulwark to an expansionist China, Germany generally doesn’t see an immediate threat to its own security. As such, Berlin is likely to balk at demands to pay all the costs for U.S. bases, which are widely viewed domestically as serving Washington’s foreign policy interests. For example, Ramstein Air Base — the largest in Germany — has been used as a vital staging post for the U.S. military interventions in Iraq and Libya, which Berlin either opposed or did not participate in.
And Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, the largest overseas military hospital in the world, is a stopping point for troops injured in Afghanistan and other missions abroad. It offers no direct benefit to Germany’s security. Similarly, Marines crisis response forces in Spain and Italy are tasked with protecting U.S. interests and diplomatic compounds in Africa on short notice rather than Europe’s territorial defense. It’s unclear whether Italy or Spain would feel obliged to pony up more for their presence.
Still, with a more assertive Russia, allies in Europe have been eager for more U.S. forces, especially along NATO’s eastern flank, which could give the Trump administration leverage. Poland has offered $2 billion to establish a permanent U.S. base in its country.
Germany spends about $1 billion or roughly 20 percent of the cost of hosting U.S. troops at various installations in the country, according to Rand Corporation data. But Germany’s payments for U.S. troops are almost entirely in kind — the provision of services or facilities.
Bloomberg reported the White House was also considering a measure to ease the financial burden — a discount for countries whose policies were in line with Washington’s.
That could be problematic for Germany, which has resisted demands from Trump to ramp up defense expenditures. By 2024, all NATO allies are expected to dedicate 2 percent of GDP to military matters. While the majority of alliance members are on track to reach the spending target, Berlin has balked at the idea and is expected to fall well short of the benchmark.
“What’s the point of troops in Germany? It’s obvious they just let anybody walk on in.”
My husband was stationed in Germany in the 70’s. I joined him. I couldn’t get a job as an RN because Germany would not allow it. Only military nurses or German nurses could work in our medical facilities there.
“...Ramstein Air Base — .... Shut it down. Work out a deal with Israel and Egypt to place a base in Sinai as a staging post for the U.S. military in the region. ... Germany has not been acting as a friend lately.”
Best Election Evah!
Exactly...and war with Germany isn’t too far off.
Remember the Hessians!!! Oh, how the worm turns.
Love, George W.
I LOVE this. I LOVE this president. I hope he tells them that cost plus 50 is a pretty good deal, but it’s all a question of what the market is willing to pay...
Market, my friends. You remember what that is, right? If everyone else is willing to pay cost plus 100 but you are only willing to pay cost plus 50, and something untoward happens, we might be too busy to wait on the bargain shoppers right away.
Countdown to the “Our troops are not mercenaries” argument 3...2...1
Agree, my namesake is for my uncle who was shot and killed in Germany three months before WWII ended. Buried in Luxembourg.
“Has nothing to do with military issues. It’s a political statement.”
And Clark AFB wasn’t a political issue? Sure it was.
Bottom Line: More stuff to move out of Germany.
But they will have to take more of the political blame for it.
Bulgaria might be better geographically, and less expensive.
Perhaps getting Germany to kick out Ramstein would shake out the funds to build a replacement for Incirlik in Bulgaria, Greece or Israel. Maybe 1/3 in each.
I thought Japan was already paying for US troops.
Armageddon is getting closer.
Poland will bend over backwards to bring our forces there, I would love to see a new base smack dab in the middle between Warsaw and Krakow.
A port near Gdansk would really put Putin in an uncomfortable spot as well.
I was there in the early 70’s with the 300 thousand troops and 500 thousand dependents and contractors. We paid rent and damages for all property/bases, it was our billions spent on their economy that enabled their businesses to grow. They can never repay what they owe us and we know they won’t especially with the ungrateful east German Merkel.
They can’t afford it. End of story. They’d have to drastically change their social states. If you can’t imagine Bernie going for the plan you shouldn’t imagine them going for it.
In his last appearance as a viable POTUS candidate, June 4 1969, Ted Kennedy said exactly the same thing. If I remember his words ,he was singling out Spanish bases, he said something like , why are we paying them to defend them. They should be paying us.
This was Fordham’s Commencement wher he was Commencement speaker. A month later he killed Mary Jo Kopechne.
We are not asking them to pay 2% of GDP to NATO. The commitment that NATO members made was to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense by 2024. To date, only five countries including the US, have met that commitment.
Sounds fair.
it’s about time too!
Greece? Surely you jest. Study your history. The socialist Greek government under Papandreou kicked us out of Greece. We closed our bases including on Crete.
A military base in Israel is a non- starter for many reasons.
Reforger? The cost of those was astronomical as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.