American Forces in Germany: Security Symbol, Loyalty Warrant or Excessive Luxury?

65
DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-3-60-72
I. Istomin (iaistomin@gmail.com), 
Moscow State Institute of International Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (MGIMO University), 76, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation;
Moscow State Institute of International Relations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (MGIMO University), 76, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation

Acknowledgements. The research was carried out at the expense of a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (project No. 17-78-20170 “Typology of Modern Military-Political Alliances and Model of Russia’s Relations with Allies”). 


Abstract. The article discusses the dynamics of the US military presence in Germany through the evolution of American foreign policy. The article presents data on the quantitative presence of the American army in Germany and assesses the impact of various incentives to change the size of the American contingent and their comparison. The presence of the US armed forces in Germany is one of the most striking examples of the long-term deployment of foreign troops on the territory of a major power. In terms of the duration and size of the contingent, it is comparable only to the deployment of American troops in Japan. In both countries, foreign troops played an occupying role after the end of World War II. In the future, the American contingent remained in them already as an ally. At the same time, in the case of Germany, the presence of foreign military personnel was combined with the creation of an efficient and relatively large army. For a long time, Tokyo was limited only by compact self-defense forces. The presence of independent capabilities to ensure security is often a prerequisite for pursuing an independent policy and encourages the refusal to deploy a contingent of another state on its territory. It is all the more surprising that in the FRG the question of the withdrawal of US forces was never seriously raised. On the contrary, the German leadership has repeatedly expressed concern about the possibility of reducing the American presence. In this it was very different from the Japanese establishment, in which the expediency of maintaining allied relations with the United States was sometimes critically assessed. The authors conclude that ensuring the loyalty of the German leadership was not associated with the size of Washington’s military presence on the territory of Germany. The buildup of the American contingent in the Federal Republic of Germany was influenced by fears around external threats, the correlation of conventional and nuclear deterrence in the US strategy and the desire to reduce military costs.

Keywords: USA, Germany, Bundeswehr, US forces, security, occupation


REFERENCES

  1. Snyder G.H. Alliance politics. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1997. 432 p.
  2. Pressman J. Warring friends: Alliance restraint in international politics. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 2011. 192 p.
  3. Cha V.D. Powerplay: The origins of the American alliance system in Asia. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2016. 352 p.
  4. Shtraus F.-I. Vospominaniya [Memoirs]. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 1991. 560 p.
  5. Shmidt G. Na blago Germanii. Puti vykhoda iz krizisa [For the good of Germany. Ways to Get Out of the Crisis] Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 1995. 288 p.
  6. Bogaturov A.D. Velikie derzhavy na Tikhom okeane: istoriya i teoriya mezhdunarodnykh otnoshenii v Vostochnoi Azii posle vtoroi mirovoi voiny (1945–1995) [Great powers in the Pacific: history and theory of international relations in East Asia after the Second World War (1945–1995)]. Moscow, Institut SShA i Kanady RAN, 1997. 353 p.
  7. Christensen T.J. Worse than a monolith: Alliance politics and problems of coercive diplomacy in Asia. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2011. 320 p.
  8. Voda K.R. Rol’ ekspertov v evolyutsii amerikano-yaponskogo al’yansa [The role of experts in the evolution of the US-Japan alliance]. International Trends, 2016, no. 2, pp. 123-132. DOI: 10.17994/IT.2016.14.2.45/9
  9. Arzamanova T.V. SShA i Zapadnaya Evropa v dele obespecheniya evropeiskoi bezopasnosti: vzglyad iz Germanii [US and Western Europe for European Security: A Perspective from Germany]. Current Problems of Europe, 2002, no. 4, pp. 28-34.
  10. Trunov F.O. Krizis otnoshenii FRG i SShA na sovremennom etape [The crisis in relations between Germany and the USA at the present stage]. International Trends, 2019, no. 2, pp. 131-148.
  11. Gaddis J.L. Strategies of containment: a critical appraisal of American national security policy during the Cold War. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005. 512 p.
  12. Van Hook J.C. Rebuilding Germany: the creation of the social market economy, 1945–1957. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004. 312 p.
  13. Snyder G.H. Deterrence and defense. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1961. 306 p.
  14. Jervis R. The illogic of American nuclear strategy. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1984. 203 p.
  15. Lostumbo M.J. et al. Overseas basing of US military forces: An assessment of relative costs and strategic benefits. Santa Monica, Rand Corporation, 2013. 487 p.
  16. Burnett A. US Army’s last tanks depart from Germany. Stars and Stripes. 04.04.2013. Available at: https://www.stripes.com/news/us-army-s-last-tanks-depart-from-germany-1.214977 (accessed 30.04.2020).
  17. Zharonkina E.A. Amerikanskaya pozitsiya po germanskomu voprosu v ramkakh sotrudnichestva stran antigitlerovskoi koalitsii [The American position on the German question within the cooperation of the Anti-Hitler Coalition]. Bulletin of Kemerovo State University, 2014, no. 3, pp. 280-292.
  18. Shifrinson J.R.I. Rising titans, falling giants: how great powers exploit power shifts. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 2018. 276 p.
  19. Kaplan L.S. NATO before the Korean War: April 1949–June 1950. Kent, Kent State University Press, 2013. 232 p.
  20. Kaplan L.S. Strategic Problems and the Central Sector, 1948–1968. An Overview. Blueprints for battle: planning for war in central Europe, 1948–1968. Hoffenaar J., Krüger D., eds. Lexington, University Press of Kentucky, 2012, pp. 5-20.
  21. Walko J.W. The Balance of Empires: United States’ Rejection of German Reunification and Stalin’s March Note of 1952. Irvine, California, Universal-Publishers, 2003. 128 p.
  22. Duffield J.S. The Soviet military threat to Western Europe: US estimates in the 1950s and 1960s. The Journal of Strategic Studies, 1992, no. 2, pp. 208-227.
  23. Dockrill S. Eisenhower’s New Look National Security Policy, 1953–61. New York, Springer, 1996. 400 p.
  24. Brady S.J. Eisenhower and Adenauer: Alliance maintenance under pressure, 1953–1960. Lanham, Lexington Books, 2009. 277 p.
  25. Gerzhoy G. Alliance coercion and nuclear restraint: how the United States thwarted West Germany’s nuclear ambitions. International Security, 2015, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 91-129.
  26. Priest A. Kennedy, Johnson and NATO: Britain, America and the dynamics of alliance, 1962–68. Oxon, Routledge, 2006. 240 p.
  27. Nelson K.L. The making of détente: Soviet-American relations in the shadow of Vietnam. Baltimore, JHU Press, 2019. 240 p.
  28. Juneau J.F. The Limits of Linkage: The Nixon Administration and Willy Brandt’s Ostpolitik, 1969–72. The International History Review, 2011, no. 2, pp. 277-297.
  29. Kennedy P. The rise and fall of the great powers: economic change and military conflict from 1500 to 2000. New York, Vintage, 2010. 704 p.
  30. Mearsheimer J.J. Conventional deterrence. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1985. 296 p.
  31. Pond E. The security debate in West Germany. Survival, 1986, no. 4, pp. 322-336.
  32. Sarotte M.E. 1989: The Struggle to Create Post-Cold War Europe-Updated Edition. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014. 370 p.
  33. Mearsheimer J.J. Back to the future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War. International Security, 1990, no. 1, pp. 5-56.
  34. Shifrinson J.R.I. Eastbound and down: The United States, NATO enlargement, and suppressing the Soviet and Western European alternatives, 1990–1992. Journal of Strategic Studies, 2020, iss. 43, no. 6–7, pp. 1-31.
  35. Kokeev A. Novye aktsenty v oboronnoi strategii i politike bezopasnosti Germanii [New Accents in Defence Strategy and Security Policy of Germany]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2018, vol. 62, no. 11, pp. 26-34. DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2018-62-11-26-34
  36. Pavlov N.V., Khokhlov V.Yu. Ekspansionizm vo vneshnei politike FRG: mif ili real’nost’? [Expansionism in the German Foreign Policy: Myth or Reality?] Contemporary Europe, 2015, no. 4 (64), pp. 69-81. DOI: 10.15211/soveurope420156980
  37. Haine J.Y. A new Gaullist moment? European bandwagoning and international polarity. International Affairs, 2015, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 991-1008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12394
  38. Trunov F.O. Germaniya i irakskii voenno-politicheskii krizis (2003) [Factors of the German course in Iraqi military and political crisis (2003)]. Contemporary Europe, 2015, no. 3, pp. 80-89. DOI: 10.15211/soveurope320158089
  39. Batyuk V.I., Volodin D.A., D’yakova N.A. Amerikanskaya voennaya politika v XXI veke: regional’nye aspekty [21st Century American Military Policy: Regional Aspects]. Moscow, ISKRAN, 2012. 148 p.
  40. Cohen A. Zakat Ameriki: geopoliticheskie posledstviya sekvestra byudzheta SShA [America’s Sunset: The Geopolitical Implications of US Sequestration]. Forbes, 11.03.2013. Available at: https://www.forbes.ru/mneniya-column/krizis/235427-zakat-ameriki-geopoliticheskie-posledstviya-sekvestra-byudzheta-ssha (accessed 29.04.2020).
  41. Vasil’ev V. Novye aspekty diskursa o “realpolitik” Berlina [New aspects of discourse about the Berlin’s Realpolitik]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2015, no. 12, pp. 30-40.
  42. Trump confirms more US troops will be sent to Poland. DW, 23.09.2019. Available at: https://www.dw.com/en/trump-confirms-more-us-troops-will-be-sent-to-poland/a-50554660 (accessed 28.04.2020).
  43. Trunov F.O. Politika FRG v khode liviiskogo (2011) i siriiskogo (2013) voenno-politicheskikh krizisov [German policy during the military and political crises in Lybia (2011) and Syria (2013)]. Current Problems of Europe, 2016, no. 3, pp. 164-185.
  44. Drezner D.W. The trouble with carrots: Transaction costs, conflict expectations, and economic inducements. Security Studies, 1999, vol. 9, no. 1-2, pp. 188-218.

Registered in System SCIENCE INDEX

For citation:
Istomin I., Sokolov A. American Forces in Germany: Security Symbol, Loyalty Warrant or Excessive Luxury?. World Eonomy and International Relations, 2021, vol. 65, No 3, pp. 60-72. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2021-65-3-60-72



Comments (0)

No comments

Add comment







Indexed

 

 

 

 

Current Issue
2022, vol. 66, No. 11
Topical Themes of the Issue:
  • Developing Countries in the New Equation of the Post-Crisis World Order 
  • U.S. Public Diplomacy as a Tool for “Political Warfare” 
  • Central Europe: Possible Scenarios
  • The Collapse of the Global Consumption Model: in Search of Sustainability
  • Future Wars in Light of the Past Experience
Submit an Article
NEW SECTION

In response to the challenges of our time the Editorial board continues to open new thematic rubrics:

“World Energy Sector after Pandemic”. We plan to publish articles presenting in-depth analysis of influence of Pandemic on the global energy sector and forecasts of further developments in its various branches.