The Pentagon’s Eastern Obsession

Proponents of the US military’s proposed move from bases in Western Europe to Eastern Europe claim that the advantages would include reduced costs and proximity to hotspots like Central Asia and Middle East. However, according to former assistant defense secretary Lawrence Korb, such claims are unfounded. The current bases in Western Europe aren't as expensive to maintain as the numbers may sound, especially when viewed vis-à-vis other military expenditures, Korb says. In addition, Germany regularly contributes to the maintenance of the bases on its territory, something which the Eastern European countries are unlikely to do. Korb argues that the reduced living costs of Eastern Europe will be surpassed by the host countries’ unwillingness to help maintain bases, their lack of resources, and the tremendous initial costs to renovate and modernize the proposed base sites. Proximity is also a poor argument, Korb says, because heavy equipment needed in combat would have to be transported on transportation links far inferior to what the US now uses in Western Europe. The more likely motive for the move, Korb concludes, is to punish “Old Europe” for failing to support the US in the war in Iraq. If this is indeed the case, Korb worries, then the Bush administration is truly “cutting off its nose to spite its face.”—YaleGlobal