Closing American military bases in Germany? Will it happen? What are the effects?

I'm writing a paper for my Politics of Western Europe class (14 pages ), and I'm writing on the subject of the Economic Effects on Germany Stemming from American Military Bases Closures. Our disagreement with Germany concerning how to handle Iraq has prompted many on Capital Hill to consider legislation to close our bases there and moving them to Poland. These people are generally the same idiots who changed the name of French fries to Freedom fries. In other words, petty fools.

Let me start by saying that I would not support the U.S. leadership if they took this course of action. Second, I do not think that this will ever happen under any circumstances.

Anyway, I'm trying to get some ideas on what to write in my paper. Here are some of the points I want to talk about:

- History of military bases (Cold War, Berlin Airlift, etc.)
- The effect on the economies of the towns surrounding the bases (Vaihingen, Boeblingen, Rammstein, etc.).
- Effect on larger cities in Germany, i.e. Stuttgart.
- The EU's policy on members lowering their debt. Both Germany and france have not been able to keep up.
- Potential loss of strategic bases and hospitals.
- Historical precedents from other base closings both in the U.S. and abroad.

Any help people can give would be greatly appreciated.

 

I haven't done any research on economic effect on Germany yet, but I wonder if there is any difference. German economy is still pretty strong right now, and I doubted if payment for the military base supported the economy.

Frankly, I will be very surpised if they moved the military base to East European countries... it cost money to move, and trained new personel in the new country. Not to mention the stability of some of these countries are unreliable.

Lastly, isn't this funny.... years after Cold War end, US is in 'war' with Germany and France, and befriended ex- Communist countries in East Europe

 

Other then the cost of creating new bases, militaryily and politically, wouldn't it make more sense to put some in the former Soviet block Nato countries?

 

I dunno, Germany and England are pretty big hubs for intra-European travel in the first place, and they have a huge amount of flights going to Middle Eastern countries. It's great access in Germany,

 

Yes, but I think practicing military manuevers might be easier in, say, Polamd, then it would be in central Germany.

Of course I have no basis for that other then the vague idea Poland is more open territorywise then Germany.

It would also prove a boost to those economies and tie those nations close to us in their early phases of becoming strong countries in their own rights.

And I'm nto exactly sure that militarily we use civilian flights to transfer units to the mid east.

 

And I'm nto exactly sure that militarily we use civilian flights to transfer units to the mid east.

I meant in the sense that it's easier to follow already established routes when transfering said units. it tells you how good the access is if so many flights go out from there.

 

America maintains bases in some 40 countries around the world, right? And half your forces are in South East Asia (Source: DoD 1998 Defence Paper), so I'd wager that keeping US Forces in Germany certain benefits America immensely from a Strategic viewpoint.
The economic effects, though, well that's another story. One thing you may want to look at J_F_T is the state of the relations between the EU and the USA - Higher under Clinton, getting really low under Bush, and ask yourself: Is this policy likely to be seen as a string of isolated events (as Americans tend to view them) or is Europe going to start percieving this as part of one big scheme? Last year, the ICJ in the Hague ruled that the European Union could pass up to US$4bn in sanctions on steel trade after last year's "steel wars". The significance of that, I'd argue, is that relations between Europe and America are beginning to fray. What I'd do is note these shifts in policy, the loss of the "common security needs" arising from the demise of the USSR and relate it back to the necessity of maintaining US bases in Europe when there really isn't a threat to repel. I mean, the economic advantages are negligible in some cases, but realistically, it boils down not to some petty, "Patriotic" nitwit in Congress, but the overall strategic advantage of maintaining bases in Europe.

Hope that helps? I can probably find some sources for you if you need them too.
E_S

 

Realistically it's far easier to get forces into position if they're forward deployed rather then all in the US.

And I'd agree the economic advantages for a nation like Germany are small, for a nation like Poland they would be much more significant.

And Janson, when those bases wer einitally set up there were no inital routes. Commerical airlines were rather small at best.

 

If you take only strategy in to account IMO keeping those troops in Germany makes no sense.
But getting them to the East would be a dangerous signal to Russia. That would mean "we don´t trust you".
Also the airbases in Germany have another drawback: The way to Italy (Aviano) or generally speaking to the South is "blocked" by the neutral countries Switzerland (has about 100 F-16) and Austria (we have about 20 Drakens which will stop at nothing to make photos of planes violating our airspace )
Yeah transferring troops to NATO periphery countries would make more sense.

 

I just saw a senator from Texas talking about this very subject. Next year the U.S. has a 128 million dollar budget to build better facilities in Germany. But, the senator (a lady named kathryn something on the foreign military spending committee) said that they were most likely not going to spend that money on Germny now, because of their leaders anti-war campaign. The U.S. troops also generate close to a billion dollars to the German GDP. The senator said they could move the troops and their money to another country in the region that has supported the U.S. in this crisis. The way she ws talking was as if her committee had already decided to do this.

Nightsun

 

The U.S. troops also generate close to a billion dollars to the German GDP. The senator said they could move the troops and their money to another country in the region that has supported the U.S. in this crisis. The way she ws talking was as if her committee had already decided to do this.

I don't have the German's GDP on hand, but what is 128 million for German's economy?

BTW, JFT, I found an excellent source for the effect of US military base closure in Germany: ( until 1995)

Reconstructing US, Scope, Impact and Opportunities Military bases in Germany
I don't have time to read 105 pages But it seems that the geist on impact is pretty minimal.

Yes, it is true that US spend billions of dollars in Germany. However, the lost of jobs were absorbed pretty quickly, especially in high density population areas. In rural sites, it is harder, forcing some people to relocate.

 

Thanks for the link Blue. I'm gonna print that up when I get to the library after class. No way i'm gonna print it in my room.

 

NATO is part of the cold war infrastructure. I think it's time for the U.S. to get out of Europe. All the way out. We don't really have a compelling reason to play a central role in the security apparatus of western europe any longer.

The economic effect of the U.S.'s military presence in Germany can't be a consideration for long range strategic military planning.

 

Germany's GDP is around 1.6 Trillion Dollars. That makes it the fourth-largest in the world after the United States , China and Japan.

How on Earth American Soldiers contribute 1 Billion a year to the German GDP is beyond me. First of all - GDP is the total of all produced goods and services so unless an American G.I. has a business in Germany they don't contribute to the German GDP. They DO of course contribute to the German ECONOMY by buying goods in shops etc. but whether that's 1 Billion I dare to doubt.

 

Don't forget foodstuffs, fuel, supplies, travel, etc.

 

With the overrated bill given to government every year, I can see it could amount to 1 billion.

 

Don't forget, we pay the Germans "rent."

 

According to that site, the German has to paid back US for " area development".

The Germans has also to come up with demoliton cost for some of the structures US left behind.

 

The U.S. had been selling the Germans parts of Robinson Barracks (just outside Stuttgart) when i was there, and it was amazing how they basically tore down the insides of the buildings and made the interiors much better for human occupation. As someone who's lived in military housing, I can say that the Germans did wonders with it. It still looked military on the outside, but inside....ooh, I would have loveds to live in those.

 

It is ridiculous to consider the motivations of Germany to be the same as those of France.

 

It's ten times as insipid to treat France and Germany as enemies when it's simply a frickin' disagreement.

Land of extremes right now, isn't it?

E_S

 

I'm in total agreement with you guys, it's petty and stupid. But it's still an issue unfortunately, and I have to write on it.

 

I worked in Wertheim near Frankfurt for a couple of weeks in the 1990's. There was an American base nearby and to tell the truth, the Germans didn't like them there much. I don't know the history or the name of the base, but I got the impression that the German people looked on the bases with derision and contempt.

 

Tufako get a clue, GDP may mean gross domestic product but it really means Gross Domestic Profit, and anything a US soldier does or buys in that country contributes to their GDP. and it's not just the fact that they won't spend the 128 mil. on those bases that will hurt Germany, it's the fact that the money will go to building bases in (for Example) Romania. And the stoppage of funds to improve our soldiers lives while away from home means that we will be taking our troops elsewhere, preferably to a country that supports the US in dyre times. 1 billion annually would really help out one of "New Europe's" countries.

Nightsun

 

on those bases that will hurt Germany, it's the fact that the money will go to building bases in (for Example) Romania.

I failed to see how it will hurt German's economy. Based on what I read so far, it seems that the Germans are actually GLAD to get rid of the bases..

Mind you, another reason why some countries host US military bases is for security reason, such as South Korea and Japan. Germany has a strong, well trained army of its own ( won a couple NATO awards). They don't need US in that regard.

I am sure Romania or " New Europe" will be happy to get those bases, for sure. It will definitely help their economy, and put them on the terrorist's black list as well.