Is Europe Worth the Trouble?

While the author is certainly not a proponent of garrison-minded isolationism, where the United States retreats to the imaginary safety of its own borders (which do not serve as impenetrable barriers, mind you), it has come to his attention that Europe is more of a strategic drain than a valuable resource in the post-Cold War era. While there are certainly bases that serve our strategic interests in the region and greater globe, in an policy age where we don't have enough assets to cover major strategic needs, Europe is certainly low on the priority list.

The first folly pursuit that springs into the author's mind is the European Missile Shield. The entire policy is positioned against two  perceived"threats" to Europe. The first is the impotent Russian bear, which should no longer be viewed as a nuclear threat to the security of its European neighbors. The second is Iran, which doesn't pose itself as a missile threat to Europe. Even if they did fire a nuclear armed missile at a European nation, it would be intercepted by AEGIS armed warships in the Mediterranean. This negates any sort of need for a ground based missile shield. From a strategic point of view, these systems would be better served in the Middle East, where conventional Iranian missiles pose a threat to allies and American forces in the region. While it certainly makes sense to aid in the defense of allies from legitimate threats, this does not mean that the United States should give up critical military capital to soothe the paranoia of European nations like Poland.

The second policy that should be cause for concern is the amount of forces we have in the region. Currently, we have around 70,000 service members stationed in Europe. What exactly are they doing? Are they strategically crucial to ongoing American success abroad? Apparently, training nations like Slovenia, which has a proud military of 7,600 men and women, for operations they'll never conduct is integral to achieving global security. Obviously, bases like Italy have proved to be useful in American operations. U.S. air force and naval assets based in the country were instrumental in establishing a no-fly zone over Libya in 2011. However the vast majority of U.S. forces can be deployed somewhere else. Or even better, brought back home. 

This sets up the stage for another post about what America should do in Europe to achieve an equilibrium in the economics of force. Phrased differently, what the U.S. should do to ensure that strategic demand is met with an appropriate amount of supply.

-Tom