The Political Inquirer

Bloggers and primary watchers alike were abuzz over John’s McCain’s famous “100 years” comments about the war in Iraq, especially when he said that “would be fine with me.” McCain and others across the political spectrum were quick to defend his comments and brought up the fact that we’ve had troops in Japan and Germany since World War 2. In that context, McCain’s statements almost make sense, but that’s only if you buy into one fact: that we should still have troops posted in these countries.

Japan, Germany, Kosovo, Egypt, South Korea - our troops are currently stationed all over the world. Looking at this helpful map posted by CNN, you might find the numbers are a bit surprising:

Iraq: 132,000
Europe: 100,000
Japan: 35,300
South Korea: 32,000
Afghanistan: 22,000
Kosovo: 1,500

Of course, there are some other low levels deployments, but if you’re interested you can see those on the map for yourself.

What are the benefits of having bases and deployments in countries outside of Iraq and Afghanistan? In some cases, it helps ensure regional security. Should something go wrong in South East Asia, Eastern Europe, or elsewhere, we’ll have troops in the area that can move quickly. Likewise, some of the troops serve as peace keepers in places formerly torn by war. Placing troops in foreign environments like these helps prevent further violence from breaking out and it also gives them the benefit of experience and training that they can’t get in the United States.

Yet these troop deployments cost the nation tens of billions of dollars ever year and divert forces that could be used elsewhere. But we should just be worried about the effect the deployments on the U.S. More troubling are the implications for other countries: the toll the bases take on the states and prefectures they’re located in. Consider for example the recent case of rape in Japan that was allegedly perpetrated by four U.S. marines. On the one hand, it’s true that the rape is an isolated incident carried out by a small group of soldiers, but on the other, it’s just one example of the stress put on these places by our bases - stress that goes largely ignored. Japanese citizens on the island of Okinawa, for instance, have repeatedly protested against the U.S. bases there. Their complaints include noise pollution, land pollution, damage to their economy, and the danger of crimes and military accidents. Helicopters and jets sometimes crash or explode above the islands - places where people have their homes and schools. About a year ago, the protests were so severe that U.S. soldiers had to be put on curfew.

Okinawa is just one example of such bases, though to be fair, it’s a historically significant one: helping with the wars in Korea and Vietnam by providing a low cost alternative to launching missions from bases in the U.S. However, does that justify the cost and the stress put on the local people?

If Germany or Japan (or any other ally) asked to install military bases in mainland America, because they really, really needed them, we would shoulder the burden? I think it’s safe to say Americans would protest. Having German helicopters roaring over your backyard and rowdy troops roaming around isn’t good for real estate prices. Nor does the U.S. really need foreign forces on its soil. America already has the protection of national security agencies and its own military, one extensive enough to be spread across the globe.

Yet is having our forces deployed in so many countries really making us more secure, or is it spreading our troops and resources too thin? There are more troops in either South Korea or Japan than there are in Afghanistan, a country where we’re still actively at war. Meanwhile, the number of troops in Europe is close to the number in Iraq. There are threats from North Korea and unrest in Eastern Europe to contend with, but in the age of fighter jets, super carriers, and ICBMs, intimidation by means of troop deployment - especially such large ones- is a bit old fashioned.

Thankfully, all these troops aren’t faced with combat on a daily basis, but couldn’t such resources be put to better use elsewhere? The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan won’t be ending anytime soon, even if they do slow down and some troops are brought home. Plus, those foreign bases are consuming our tax dollars at enormous rates. The U.S.’s military spending is about equal to the entire rest of the world’s, combined. Who are we so worried about?