The previous post looked at overseas basing costs and concluded that there were no real savings from shutting them down unless the United States also cut the military budget. Which, of course, we could do without ending our defense obligations.
The post did not account for the fact that NATO has a common budget, funded in part by the United States. That common budget comes to ... €2.1 billion, or $2.4 billion. The U.S. pays 22% of the common budget, or $523 million per year.
There are also individual NATO trust funds established for particular projects. They come to a grand total of €69 million, or $78 million. The U.S. share can vary, but assuming it’s around 22%, then you get a total U.S. contribution of $17 million. (The trust fund projects aren’t annual, but let’s run with that.)
So destroying the entire postwar Atlantic alliance system would save us $540 million per year. Call it a buck-seventy for every man, woman and child in the United States.
That is not a lot of money. But hey, it is something. Make the Euros cough that up! Yeah! U-S-A! Winning!
Throw in part of $100m for the deployment costs of Nuclear Sharing with Germany, Belgium, Turkey, etc. Apparently the hosts pay to maintain the facilities and delivery aircraft but NATO as a whole does not fund the program.
http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/defense-spending-bill-requires-report-cost-nukes-europe/
Maybe President Drumpf could end the B61 modernization program alongside a pullback to reduce costs... but somehow I don't think that's likely.
Posted by: Phil | April 01, 2016 at 02:44 PM
Cost savings of downsizing the nuclear triad? That's my pet hobby horse.
Posted by: Logan | April 01, 2016 at 02:58 PM
A great idea, Logan, but first you'd have to explain to President Trump just what the triad is ...
Posted by: Noel Maurer | April 01, 2016 at 05:47 PM
I'm very conflicted about America's empire. On the one hand unraveling America's role in NATO and eastern Asia would seem to preclude future wars in the Middle East, North Africa, and Southwest Asia. Take away America's forward bases and ground wars of choice are probably made nearly impossible from a logistics standpoint.
On the other hand remove American influence and the power vacuum would be filled by non-democratic and aggressive powers in some places. The odds of regional wars would rise for a while until a new order was formed.
Posted by: Dave K | April 03, 2016 at 11:49 PM