The Pentagon, for the first time in decades, has no plans to release a much-anticipated review of its troop placement abroad — a move that snubs lawmakers and U.S. allies, who use the analysis to determine budgets and discern American military policy.
Officials are instead opting to hold more informal conversations, according to four U.S. and NATO defense officials and three European diplomats, who say the administration believes it has provided enough information in strategy documents that point to a shifted focus on the Western Hemisphere.
The Global Posture Review, which administrations have historically produced early in the term, outlines military priorities and where the Defense Department plans to station assets. But the department’s decision to buck precedent, which has not been previously reported, underscores the go-it-alone pattern of this White House. Its officials have regularly informed allies and Congress of military actions only after they have occurred — from boat strikes in the Caribbean to attacks on Iran.
The move is likely to cause consternation on Capitol Hill and in European capitals among officials who are desperate for a clearer sense of the administration’s military ambitions.
“If we don’t have that, it’s certainly not helpful for our work,” said Jim Banks (R-Ind.), a former naval officer and Senate Armed Services Committee member. “I’d be disappointed by that decision.”
Lawmakers already are concerned about the lack of information coming from the Pentagon. Senate Armed Services Committee members — who rely on the review for their annual defense authorization bill work — said officials have not yet informed them that the document won’t be completed. Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers said pushing ahead without that analysis would prove problematic.
Foregoing the review “shows that this administration has no plans,” said Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
NATO allies have voiced concerns about the Pentagon’s priorities since officials suddenly decided last year not to replace a rotational Army brigade in Romania.
“The big ask from our side is predictability,” said one of the people familiar with the situation, a NATO military official. “We realize that we need to step up and take much more responsibility for our own security, and we are. But we need predictability.” The official, like some others interviewed, was granted anonymity to discuss internal planning.
The Defense Department defended its interactions with lawmakers and allies. "We will continue to be as forthright and engaging with Congress on this issue as possible," the Pentagon said in a statement, adding that officials are "focused on implementing the [National Defense Strategy] guidance across all aspects of what the department does, the posture being one of them.”
The last review, released in 2021 under the Biden administration, foreshadowed an increased focus on the Pacific. It also sketched the path forward in a post-Afghanistan era where the challenges from China and Russia posed a larger threat than counterterrorism operations.
Ponderous strategy documents like the posture review always run the risk of being overtaken by events. The Biden administration’s review was published in November 2021, just three months before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which permanently changed the security situation throughout Europe and immediately rendered pieces of the report outdated. The invasion prompted the U.S. to send thousands more troops to Europe on new rotations and led to a rapid rise in NATO defense spending.
But allies fear that the lack of a tangible document could bring unwelcome surprises, especially from an unpredictable administration that focuses more on military might than partnerships.
“Our posture in the future will be based first and foremost on our own national security power projection, the ability to defend our people and our interests,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters this month. “But no doubt, working alongside our partners, the president will look at what makes the most sense going forward."
Another one of the people familiar with the situation, a diplomat from a NATO country, emphasized the “stress” that the uncertainty of U.S. posture planning causes among European governments and military planners.
German officials, whose country hosts the largest number of U.S. troops in Europe, agreed with a managed, gradual drawdown of the American military presence. “But this needs to happen in accordance with German plans for a surge of military capacities,” one of the officials said.
They had pushed for close coordination on potential U.S. troop movements during German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius’ trip to Washington last summer, said one of the NATO officials, but there has been little in the way of visible consultation since.
European diplomats often point to the latest National Defense Authorization Act, which blocks the Pentagon from reducing the number of troops stationed or deployed to Europe below 76,000 for longer than 45 days, as an indication that changes won’t happen suddenly.
“The administration has realized that a stable Europe is important for them, if only to keep that problem of Russians off their back because they want to turn to China,” the NATO official said.
Some administration allies shrugged off the lack of a review.
“It’s always good to have additional input from the administration,” said Sen. Mike Rounds, (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “But if not, we’ve still got to do our job.”
But Democrats insist it reinforces how the the White House and Pentagon behave as if they are above the law.
“This administration has been so opaque on everything that it’s hard for the committee to fulfill its oversight responsibilities,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
“We need to get that information, and the people of this country need to understand what their strategy is, because it’s not clear so far.”
Stefanie Bolzen at WELT contributed to this report. WELT, like POLITICO, is a member of the Axel Springer Global Reporters Network, a multi-publication initiative publishing global scoops, investigations, interviews, op-eds and analysis.
via Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/MQBZcFq
