As the United States prosecutes the war on terrorism, it is also in the process of adjusting its global security posture. Not surprisingly, the American presence in Europe will be profoundly affected by the U.S. calculations, and hence by extension, so will NATO. It is no exaggeration that the whispered conversations within the Pentagon reverberate within the halls of NATO headquarters, so the ultimate decision has the potential to rock the Alliance, no matter how benign it may appear to the United States. In this monograph, the author examines America's choices regarding the basing of ground troops in Europe. He considers three major options available to the United States - complete withdrawal, annual rotations, or restructuring the Alliance to accommodate a smaller U.S. presence. Maintaining the status quo in Europe is not a viable option, since it does not rectify the U.S. over-extension of forces or accommodate the dynamics associated with the war on terrorism. While weighing the advantages and disadvantages of each option, he does not lose sight of the ultimate objective of NATO - to provide credible land power for the full spectrum of operations. The author has expanded his concept of the integrated multinational division by introducing a NATO 3-3 Force Structure concept that rests on a smaller NATO ground force adaptive to the capabilities and wealth of member states; increases interoperability (technologically and procedurally); and supports the expeditionary force structure already in progress by the formal establishment of three standing Combined Joint Task Forces (CJTF). Additionally, he recommends the adoption of nine division-sized bases in Europe located at key geostrategic points for greater access to the Middle East and Africa. The author also advocates withdrawing U.S. political support of, and a priori support of, the use of NATO assets for the European Union Rapid Reaction Force. (4 figures).

The author examines America's options regarding the basing of ground troops in Europe and considers three major options available to the United States--complete withdrawal, annual rotations, and restructuring the Alliance to accommodate a smaller U.S. presence. While weighing the advantages and disadvantages of each option, he does not lose sight of the ultimate objective of NATO--to provide credible land power for the full spectrum of operations. He introduces a NATO 3-3 Force Structure concept that rests on a smaller NATO ground force adaptive to the capabilities and wealth of member states; increases interoperability (technologically and procedurally); and supports the expeditionary force structure already in progress by the formal establishment of three standing combined joint task forces (CJTF). Additionally, he recommends the adoption of nine division-sized bases in Europe located at key geostrategic points for greater access to the Middle East and Africa.

The author examines America's options regarding the basing of ground troops in Europe and considers three major options available to the United States--complete withdrawal, annual rotations, and restructuring the Alliance to accommodate a smaller U.S. presence. While weighing the advantages and disadvantages of each option, he does not lose sight of the ultimate objective of NATO--to provide credible land power for the full spectrum of operations. He introduces a NATO 3-3 Force Structure concept that rests on a smaller NATO ground force adaptive to the capabilities and wealth of member states; increases interoperability (technologically and procedurally); and supports the expeditionary force structure already in progress by the formal establishment of three standing combined joint task forces (CJTF). Additionally, he recommends the adoption of nine division-sized bases in Europe located at key geostrategic points for greater access to the Middle East and Africa.

The author examines America's options regarding the basing of ground troops in Europe and considers three major options available to the United States--complete withdrawal, annual rotations, and restructuring the Alliance to accommodate a smaller U.S. presence. While weighing the advantages and disadvantages of each option, he does not lose sight of the ultimate objective of NATO--to provide credible land power for the full spectrum of operations. He introduces a NATO 3-3 Force Structure concept that rests on a smaller NATO ground force adaptive to the capabilities and wealth of member states; increases interoperability (technologically and procedurally); and supports the expeditionary force structure already in progress by the formal establishment of three standing combined joint task forces (CJTF). Additionally, he recommends the adoption of nine division-sized bases in Europe located at key geostrategic points for greater access to the Middle East and Africa.

Ten years have elapsed since the fall of the Berlin Wall, which served as a fitting symbol for the end of the Cold War. That historic juncture brought into question the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which has served Alliance members so well since its founding in 1949. It also brought into question the rationale for America s continued deep involvement in European security affairs. With the gradual realization that the Russian menace is essentially dead, at least for the next 10 to 15 years and perhaps longer, and with NATO s missions having evolved well beyond the original purpose of territorial defense, debate on both sides of the Atlantic has begun to intensify concerning the vital issue of where NATO should be headed and America s relation to the Alliance. To bring an array of informed voices to the debate, four institutions--the Office of the Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College, the Irving B. Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies of the University of Chicago, and the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago--joined hands to sponsor a symposium titled The Future of U.S. Military Presence in Europe, held at the University of Chicago on August 4, 1999. The present book is an outgrowth of this symposium. It is not designed to set forth a literal record of words and events in the mold of the traditional symposium proceedings, but rather is organized as an anthology of individual chapters complemented by selected questions, answers, and comments by symposium participants and attendees.

Ten years have elapsed since the fall of the Berlin Wall, which served as a fitting symbol for the end of the Cold War. That historic juncture brought into question the main edifice of western European security arrangements -- the North Atlantic Treaty Organization -- that had served Alliance members so well since NATO's founding in 1949. It also brought into question the rationale for America's continued deep involvement in European security affairs. With the gradual realization that the Russian menace is essentially dead, at least for the next 10 to 15 years and perhaps longer, and with NATO's missions having evolved well beyond the original purpose of territorial defense, debate on both sides of the Atlantic has begun to intensify concerning the vital issue of where NATO should beheaded and America's relation to the Alliance. To bring an array of informed voices to the debate, four institutions -- the Office of the Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College, the Irving B. Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies of the University of Chicago, and the Program on International Security Policy at the University of Chicago joined hands to sponsor a symposium titled The Future of U.S. Military Presence in Europe," held at the University of Chicago on 4 August 1999. The present book is an outgrowth of this symposium. It is not designed to set forth a literal record of words and events in the mold of the traditional symposium "proceedings," but rather is organized as an anthology of individual chapters complemented by selected questions, answers, and comments by symposium participants and attendees. The symposium opening address by Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre (Chapter 1) and the keynote address by the Supreme Allied Commander Europe General Wesley Clark (Chapter 2) cogently set the stage for discussion. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 address the first panel topic, "Is Europe Still Strategically Important to the United States? Chapters 6, 7, and 8 tackle the second topic, Potential New Missions for NATO in the 21st Century, while Chapters 9, 10, and 11 are devoted to the last topic, What Type of Deployed Forces Does the United States Require to Meet Its Commitments in Europe? Noteworthy among the commentaries is the wrap-up by General Crosbie E. Saint (USA Ret.). As Commander in Chief of U.S. Army Europe during the period of the Gulf War, General Saint supplied the U.S. Army VII Corps, nominally slated as an element of NATO forces, to the coalition command that executed Operation DESERT STORM.