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.
I lived three years in Athens. The November 17 terrorist group was still active and we still had the huge demonstrations annually surrounding the US Embassy on November 17. The US has been blamed for the Regime of the Colonels in the 1960s and early 1970s. Bringing back the US military to Greece is a non-starter politically.
And never forget how deeply the Greeks hate the Turks. It is an eternal blood feud that colors everything Greece does in terms of foreign policy.
BRING THEM HOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In answer to #13: The long stated reason for keeping US Troops in Germany was to “...keep the Russians out, the Germans down and US in.” If we stay much longer we will be building mosques for the mutants.
this puts a much more positive spin on it from the story I posted, yesterday! MAGA! :)
True, only in that Trump means business.
But in a larger sense, the mafia is what made America worse. Trump now has to undo all that garbage.
classic negotiating strategy: open negotiations with higher demands than what you’re willing to ultimately accept ...
Pay up.
Exactly! Who, other than Donald Trump, would even mention this?
I love what he's trying to accomplish here.
Not only do our troops feed their economy...but our troops allow each of those countries to spend far, far less on their own defense. Much of that money in return is turned towards "social" programs.
That sounds like their problem, not ours.
The Russians will do Democratic Socialism for free. Bwahaha.
Yes it is beautiful. Went to visit it also when I was stationed in Italy. Got to take a picture of his marker to show relatives back home.
I find the European border situation even more frightening than our own.
Most demographic projections show Europe will be Muzzie-dominated in several generations. Perhaps we shouldn’t spend another red cent defending rich countries like Germany (via NATO) because it’s pointless to do so, knowing the demographics.
Europe has committed cultural suicide, thanks to Merkel allowing over 1 million young angry Sharia-Law following Muslim males into the country! What was she thinking? (well, the bottom line that the naive Euros are not told by their media is Merkel is beholden to the large German corporations who want cheap labor).
Instead of defending Europe, the writing is on the wall, so let Putin have Europe (sans our Brexit Britain friend) and Putin can strong-arm the Muzzie problem much better than the spineless PC Euros.
Better to let Putin have Europe than the Muzzies (he at least represents Western Civilization). France is now 8% Muzzie with a high birth rate, so in perhaps 20-30 years, Muzzies will democratically control France — and their nukes. Ouch!! Scary.
Putin can be a good ally of ours in the forthcoming clash of civilizations (Western vs. Muzzies). There is no reason why we should be sparring with Putin because Europe will be our new enemy in decades to come.
For a preview of Europe, watch this special report: Inside Muslim majority neighborhoods of Malmo, Sweden – YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWSMURYM7bA
“Ft. Trump” has a couple possible locations per Polish media. Near Torun and BBydgoszcz.
Will they pay cost plus 50% like Trump wants? The $2 billion they offered for the armored division wouldn't even begin to build the base much less pay the expenses of the troops.
I’d prefer to see them stay in Germany but squeeze some money out of the Germans for it. There are still a lot of advantages to staying in Germany if we are going to have a major military presence in Europe. The infrastructure is already there, and Germany is the transportation hub of Europe and dominates the northern European plain.
Sounds right.
Great question. The other important, and related question is what are we defending there? This isn’t the Europe of the past, and given the self-inflicted muslim invasion it is only a matter of time before we are essentially defending a muslim confederacy. Seems our time and resources would be better spent preparing to defend ourselves FROM the future islamized Europe, rather than defending it from others.
I’d tell them that either they get rid of the useless hoards of immigrants they let in or we are out permanently.
We are wiling to help the native population but NOT those useless dangerous hoards.
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.