[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 4025-4026]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     DEPLOYMENT OF TROOPS IN EUROPE

  Mr. SMITH. Madam President, I rise today to speak for a few moments 
about, what I feel, is a very important issue--regarding NATO and the 
deployment of great armed forces in Europe.
  I, like many of my colleagues, have watched and listened with concern 
to some of our European allies' thoughts and actions regarding the 
inspections in Iraq.
  It has caused many in this town, both in this Chamber and in the 
government to ponder the merits of some of our allies that are new 
members of NATO . . . and the fine job they have done in supporting 
this Nation on fledgling budgets but with the heart of gold and fervor 
of patriotism often found in new democracies.
  I believe that it is high time that we consider the merits of a 
limited redeployment of some U.S. forces either on a permanent or 
rotating basis from Germany to alternative locations in Eastern and 
Southern Europe.
  The current alignment of U.S. forces in Europe, particularly their 
concentration in Germany, reflects a geopolitical reality that no 
longer exists. There has not been significant enough realignment of 
capabilities and assets since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
  We no longer expect Soviet tanks to come rolling over the Folda Gap. 
Why are U.S. forces, therefore, still on a cold war footing?
  During the 1990s, America and its allies agonized over the future of 
NATO. Now that we have reaffirmed that NATO will continue to exist and 
grow, and that the U.S. will remain engaged in Europe, we should ask 
ourselves what it should look like and how it can best serve our 
national and common security interests.
  As attention turns to the Middle East, we should be thinking about 
where our troops should be stationed over the longer term. Given that 
the military flashpoints in the future are likely to revolve around the 
Caucuses, Iraq, the Middle East and North Africa, closer proximity of 
U.S. troops is of the utmost necessity.
  Since Berlin has long ceased to be the fault line for military 
conflict, I urge my colleagues and the Administration to consider 
redeploying U.S. troops from Germany in a direction, and in a manner, 
that reflects the challenges of the future rather than the past.
  I was proud to support the inclusion of Czech Republic, Hungary and 
Poland into NATO. I am also supportive of the aspiration of others to 
join that Alliance and to make the democratic and budgetary reforms 
necessary to bolster their candidacy.
  I am proud that seven other nations, including Bulgaria and Romania, 
are candidates for membership.
  By deploying U.S. forces to new locations to the East or South of 
Germany, to nations that enjoy new or prospective membership in NATO, 
we would demonstrate our firm commitment to those countries.
  Doing so would also reflect new geopolitical realities: first, we 
have cooperative and constructive relations with Russia, and secondly, 
points to the south of Europe will continue to require more of our 
attention.
  As Secretary Rumsfeld has noted, while ties between the people of 
Germany and America remain strong, on a governmental level, our 
bilateral relations are increasingly out of sync.

[[Page 4026]]

  I couldn't agree more.
  Well before Mr. Schroeder began his attacks on President Bush and 
before the incessant German criticism of the administration's efforts 
to combat terrorism and the threat posed by Iraq--Germany had imposed 
increasing and burdensome restrictions on the way the U.S. military 
could maneuver and train in Germany.
  Basing and operating costs in Germany one of the most industrialized 
and rich nations of Europe are high. Though start-up costs of 
relocating some U.S. forces to countries such as Poland or Romania 
might be high, over time such relocation would present savings.
  Some Eastern or Southern European countries would be keen to host 
U.S. forces, either permanently or on a rotating basis.
  They would welcome a U.S. military presence for the strategic and 
political dividends involved, and not least for the positive economic 
impact that this would entail. They would welcome us in the spirit of 
friendship.
  In particular, I think the administration should strongly consider 
redeploying NATO forces to Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. Poland has 
bases and training grounds well-suited for U.S. military training, 
while Romania and Bulgaria are both in the process of upgrading their 
bases under the terms of their NATO membership.
  Operating with fewer restrictions than on German bases will allow 
American troops to train more effectively, thus maintaining military 
readiness at the highest possible level.
  Redeployment of U.S. forces to Romania and/or Bulgaria would ease 
strategic pressure on Turkey, a vital American ally.
  With its location near the center of the world's least stable 
regions, we should not leave Ankara to stand as the sole pressure point 
when the U.S. projects forces eastward and southward from Europe.
  Someday the political situation might force even a generally friendly 
Turkish government to resist America using Turkey as a staging point. 
American bases in Bulgaria and Romania would shift some of the burden 
from this hard-pressed American friend.
  Likewise, bases in Bulgaria and Romania would provide the Turks, who 
will remain key partners in the new era, the diplomatic cover to 
continue to assist the U.S.
  Nations that have escaped the yoke of communism in Central and 
Southern Europe have been among the most active and outspoken 
supporters of U.S. policy particularly the global war on terrorism and 
U.S. efforts to contain Iraq and North Korea.
  Perhaps that is because these nations, unlike their continental 
neighbors to the West, know what it is like to live without security, 
freedom and democracy.
  As we move forward on this critical issue, Congress should authorize 
and the Administration should thoroughly study, the military and 
financial implications of European redeployment.
  It is also an issue to broach with the Russian Federation, as it may 
require renegotiation of the Treaty Conventional Armed Forces in 
Europe. We must emphasize that it is not directed at Moscow but rather 
can form the basis of a closer NATO-Russia relationship.
  I would note that a few days ago, Senators Shelby, Bunning, Allard, 
Collins, Sessions, Brownback, McCain, Kyl, Hutchinson, Craig, Ensign, 
Santorum, Warner and I sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld 
requesting that the Department of Defense undertake an immediate study 
of U.S. bases in Europe that should be geared to U.S. national 
interests.
  We asked that issues considered in such a study include, but not be 
limited to: force structure, length of deployment, infrastructure, 
dependents and dependent housing and services, and costs regardless of 
category.
  I believe that was a good first step toward thinking about the issue 
of deployment of our forces in Europe. I think that we should do more 
on this issue and I will work towards that end.

                          ____________________