What remains are forces sufficient to meet our interests and fulfill our NATO Article 5 obligations - namely, that an attack on one member of the alliance is considered an attack on all, and is to be defended as such.
Our installations in Europe provide necessary waypoints and proximate access to trouble spots in the Middle East, where other US interests lie. Without these intermediary stops to troubled regions, the military would be forced to expend more time and money, and mission risk would be heightened. The US Air Force commander in Europe, Gen. Mark A. Welsh III, recently remarked, "The intent of forward-based forces is to provide an option to the president of the United States to respond to a contingency situation."
Additionally, US forces in Europe are fully engaged with NATO Allies and partner nations performing military-to-military engagements, training and exercises every day - fulfilling a readiness mandate should war break out.
There are more than 1,400 individual annual military engagements within the US European Command (EUCOM), of different sizes and scope. Each helps strengthen the partnership, resulting in successes like last year's NATO-led Operation Unified Protector over Libya.
Lastly, EUCOM conducts over 100 exercises and operations aimed at enhancing transatlantic security and defending US interests forward.
Why would we retreat from these substantial investments?
In my own experience, our wing in England forged meaningful partnerships with: the Royal Air Force at RAF Brize Norton; the Italian Air Force's 14th Wing at Pratica Di Mare; and the French Air Force's air-to-air refueling unit at Base Aérienne 125, Istres, France. We built each relationship over time with trust and understanding and each partnership integrated exchange, training and education opportunities of different levels.
Exercises such as Austere Challenge, Combined Endeavor, Jackal Stone and others further strengthened bonds by which participating nations can plan militarily, execute operations with minimum preparation time and understand the strengths and weaknesses of one another, more easily mitigating the stresses of future operations.
US policy makers need to think carefully about the costs and risks of reducing forces and capabilities in Europe as a function of our interests and commitments regardless of what the defense strategic guidance states.
Now is not the time to retreat from Europe.
