Trump nearly halves US military presence in Romania, fanning fears of bigger Europe exodus

LONDON – It was designed to be low-key. In a move that went unnoticed by most media outlets, the United States military announced that 700 of its soldiers currently deployed in Europe won’t be replaced when they return home from their current tour of duty.

So far, hardly remarkable: The planned pullback affects less than 1 per cent of the estimated 84,000 US military personnel stationed in various European countries.

And US President Donald Trump deliberately played down the move’s importance. “It’s not very significant; it’s not a, not a big deal,” he told journalists.

But European leaders are hardly reassured. Although small, the troop withdrawal will almost halve the US military presence in Romania, a key European front-line state closest to where the current fighting between Russians and Ukrainians is raging.

And this may be just the start of a broader US withdrawal from Europe.

President Trump has long opposed US military deployments in Europe, which he dismissed as merely allowing the Europeans to spend less on their own defences.

Yet throughout the first Trump presidency, the size of the US contingent in Europe barely changed. And the Joe Biden administration boosted US troop numbers with additional deployments after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which

started in February 2022

.

The bulk of the US forces continues to be billeted in Germany, right in the heart of the continent, a deployment pattern that goes back to the start of the Cold War almost eight decades ago.

However, since 2022, the US has also deployed additional troops in Eastern Europe, closer to Russia’s borders.

Russian President Vladimir Putin often cites these deployments as the chief reason for his decision to send tanks into Ukraine. But the Russian argument is false.

Forward US deployments largely came after, and not before, Russia’s invasion. And in all cases, the US purpose was to reassure its allies, rather than plan for a potential US incursion into Russian territory, as Mr Putin alleged.

The US reassurance concentrated on Europe’s northern and southern flanks, considered the continent’s most vulnerable spots.

Roughly 2,000 US soldiers were deployed in the three small Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania on Europe’s northern edges. And a similarly sized US contingent was located in Romania on the continent’s south-eastern extremities.

In all cases, the US troops operate as part of a broader multinational contingent composed of many European contributing nations, all members of Nato, Europe’s key military alliance. So, at least in theory, any thinning out of the US presence is unlikely to affect the continent’s current security arrangements.

Indeed, the US is portraying its intention to reduce troops in Romania as a compliment to Europe’s military preparations. In a press statement issued by the US command in Europe on Oct 29, the move was presented as “a positive sign of increased European capability and responsibility”.

“Our Nato allies are meeting President Trump’s call to take primary responsibility for the conventional defence of Europe,” the communique said.

Yet few in Europe are reassured.

To start with, there is an inherent contradiction between the arguments the US used to persuade the Europeans to spend more on their defences.

Initially, the Trump administration argued that unless the Europeans boost their defence expenditure, the US would withdraw its troops from the continent.

But now that the Europeans have pledged to spend far more on their militaries, Washington claims this effort justifies US troop withdrawals. The Europeans appear locked in a lose-lose game in which if they pay less, they risk US troop reductions, but if they spend more, they apparently encourage troop reductions.

To make matters worse, there was little consultation before the US decided to shrink its deployment in Romania; the Romanians were just told of the decision. And although the cut in troop levels in Romania may be small, it is strategically significant. The Romanians have Europe’s longest border with Ukraine and host a major training hub for Ukrainian pilots.

The US troops based on Romania’s Black Sea shores are just a few hundred kilometres from Russia’s key battlefields in Ukraine. And Romania also hosts Nato’s missile defence system, which matters to the whole alliance and has been the target of repeated Russian threats.

The risk is that Russia may interpret this thinning out of US presence as an indication that Washington is no longer interested in this theatre of operation.

The biggest worry now is that the partial withdrawal from Romania is the start of a wider cut in US troops in Europe. Rumours circulating in European capitals suggest that future drawdowns may affect smaller US military units positioned in Bulgaria, Hungary and Slovakia.

The Trump administration earned a rare rebuke from two top Republican lawmakers, who have criticised the decision to reduce US troops in Romania.

“Unfortunately, the Pentagon’s decision appears uncoordinated and directly at odds with the President’s strategy,” wrote Senator Roger Wicker and Representative Mike Rogers on the respective web pages of their committees, stressing that “it is concerning that Congress was not consulted in advance”.

Republican Representative Mike Turner, who chairs the US delegation to the Nato Parliamentary Assembly, also expressed his concern, recalling that “Congress has been clear that US force posture across Europe must remain robust and resolute” in view of Russia’s continued invasion of Ukraine.

On the Democratic side, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the most senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, issued a similarly blunt assessment. She called the reported cuts a “deeply misguided move that undercuts our efforts to pressure Putin to finally come to the negotiating table and to bolster our European partners’ ability to defend themselves”.

Mr Mark Rutte, Nato’s secretary-general, arrived in Romania on Nov 5 in a bid to reassure the Romanians that the US drawdown will not weaken the country’s strong support from the alliance.

And it is possible that, when the US finally releases its much-delayed Global Posture Review – a study on where the Trump administration wishes to place its forces around the world – Europe will be spared further cuts in its troop deployment.

But no European government is betting on such positive outcomes.