“We are going to have two brigades that are uniquely skilled and will look like many of our European partners’ units: an airborne brigade and a Stryker brigade.”
The result, he said, will be “the right number to get at the mission we are going to be assigned in 2016,” he said. “So in my mind, this is a strategic rebalancing and not a reduction or some kind of move away from Europe. In no way, shape or form do I see that.”
[EUCOM commander Navy Adm. James G.]Stavridis told Congress the new rotational brigade combat team in Europe will go a long way to mitigate the loss of two permanent ones. “Instead of being a static BCT essentially parked in Germany, this would be a BCT that could rotate its battalions one time into Eastern Europe, one time into the Balkans, one time into the Baltics, as well as other places that U.S. European Command might be asked to operate,” he said.
We will add more special forces, too.
But the main line in arguing we are really increasing forces is that the two heavy brigades that are being eliminated from Europe were being rotated through CENTCOM theaters of war. So we didn't have them anyway. Uh huh. That's one way to look at it.
Or that's a lot of--sunshine--being spread. You can look at it as we will have two fewer combat brigades in Europe--and none of them will be heavy.
Plus, one US-based brigade will rotate through Bulgaria and Romania, I assume, in battalion-sized exercises. We'll see how long that lasts.
I've long had different views on the importance of keeping the Army in Europe in reasonable strength. I still don't think that 5 brigades are too many given the missions in the region and the stakes involved in keeping Europe peaceful and friendly.
But I worry too much, perhaps. I'll take off the gloomy mask of tragedy and put on a happy face!
What can possibly go wrong in Europe, right?
