DOCSLIB.ORG

OSW Commentary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OSW Commentary OSW Commentary CENTRE FOR EASTERN STUDIES NUMBER 348 14.08.2020 www.osw.waw.pl USA – Germany – NATO’s eastern flank Transformation of the US military presence in Europe Justyna Gotkowska At the end of July, US Defence Secretary Mark Esper announced plans to withdraw approximately 12 000 US troops from Germany. Reactions in Berlin were varied. The main narrative is that of Ger- many being penalised and transatlantic ties being undermined. In anticipation of the US presidential election, the federal government is being guarded in its statements. The German federal states affected by the cuts have started lobbying to stop the plans. The political parties in Germany are divided in their views on the Trump administration’s decision, which is welcomed by almost half of German society. Regardless of the motives, the Pentagon’s plans show the trend in the restructuring of the US permanent military presence in Europe. US permanent forces in Europe could in future be cut further as the US is less and less engaged in the Middle East and Africa. The units being recalled from Germany will not be moved permanently to allies east of the Oder. For NATO’s eastern flank, the Pentagon is developing the concept of a flexible, scalable presence, allowing rapid reductions, but also rapid reinforcement of US forces. The changes to the US military presence in Europe are chal- lenging for the European allies. A departure from the standard debate on the US’ withdrawal from Europe or on the NATO-Russia Founding Act is needed. The discussion is overdue on how to adapt to the transformation of the US presence with regard to collective defence within NATO, and how Europe, and not only France, should engage in crisis management in the European neighbourhood. The US military presence in Germany stationed in West Germany. Since the beginning of in 2020 the 1990s, the permanent presence of US troops in Europe has been successively reduced, and stood Germany currently hosts the largest permanent at 112 000 in 2004. At the same time, the range of contingent of US troops in Europe, and the second US military activities has been expanded to cover largest in the world (see Figure 1). The concen- engagements outside of the European theatre. tration of US military installations in (western) Germany is a legacy of the US occupation and its The recent major reductions in the US military strong military presence in West Germany during presence in Europe were made by the Obama the Cold War. Just before the fall of the Berlin Wall administration. In 2013, the last US tanks left the in 1989, approximately 250 000 US troops were continent, and the permanent US military presence EDITORS: Mateusz Gniazdowski, Katarzyna Kazimierska, Szymon Sztyk TRANSLATION: Jon Tappenden Centre for Eastern Studies DTP: Wojciech Mańkowski ul. Koszykowa 6a, 00-564 Warsaw, Poland tel.: (+48) 22 525 80 00, [email protected] The views expressed by the authors of the papers www.osw.waw.pl do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Polish authorities was decreased to approximately 60 000 troops. the country in 2002. Thus Germany was among The US Army in Europe has maintained the larg- the countries with the lowest bilateral costshar- est permanent contingent with two light brigade ing percentage, along with Greece, Belgium, and combat teams ( a Stryker brigade in Vilseck, Ger- the UK1. many, and an airborne infantry brigade in Vicenza, Italy) and a combat aviation brigade (in Ansbach, US command structures, installations, and forces Germany). In the US Air Forces in Europe three have not served as a means of defence of Ger- fighter wings (Spangdahlem, Germany, Aviano in many against conventional armed attack since the Italy, and Lakenheath in the UK) one airlift wing 1990s. The US has been using them to conduct US (Ramstein, Germany), and one air refuelling wing operations in Africa and the Middle East, includ- (Mildenhall, UK) were left. US tactical nuclear ing in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya. The Ramstein weapons (significantly reduced after the end of Air Base is the largest transhipment airbase for the Cold War) remained in Europe as part of the troops, cargo, and patients to and from thea- NATO nuclear sharing programme, with a nuclear tres of US operations outside of Europe. In turn, facility in Büchel, Germany among others. US Naval the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, located Forces Europe-Africa headquarters was placed in a short distance away, is the largest US Army Naples, with the US 6th Fleet being stationed in hospital outside of the United States, and takes Italy and Spain. Following the cuts made by the care of wounded soldiers coming from Iraq and Obama administration, approximately 35 000 Afghanistan among others. military and 11 600 civilian personnel (see Figure 2) remained in Germany. The US forces stationed in Germany were also in- volved in activities on NATO’s eastern flank – in the In recent decades, Germany has be- Baltic States, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. Since come a hub for US power projection 2011, the 52nd Fighter Wing in Spangdahlem and to the Middle East and Africa. the 86th Airlift Wing in Ramstein sends an Avia- tion Detachment to Łask, Poland. Since 2017, The US military presence has been concentrated in the Vilseck Stryker brigade has been rotationally four federal states, Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, providing a contingent for the NATO battle group Rhineland-Palatinate, and Hesse (see Map). Over in Poland, and has also taken part in exercises on the years, Germany became a hub primarily for the NATO’s eastern flank, such as the 2015 and 2016 US Army, which after Obama’s cuts, maintained Dragoon Ride. a Stryker brigade and a combat aviation brigade in Bavaria, along with major training infrastruc- Berlin on reductions of US troops ture, with the largest training areas in Europe, in Grafenwöhr and Hohenfels. The training centres At the end of July, US Defense Secretary Mark in these locations have been used not only by the Esper announced plans to withdraw 11 900 US US military, but by other NATO allies and partners troops from Germany, thus reducing the US as well. The US Army has also maintained large military presence from approximately 36 000 logistical, medical and intelligence facilities in to 24 000 (see Table 1). Some parts of the com- Germany. In 2018, the permanent US presence mand structures are to be moved from Germany in Germany was strengthened further. A field (to Belgium and elsewhere), the Stryker brigade artillery brigade, with two MLRS battalions, and is to be withdrawn to the US, and most of the a short-range air defence artillery battalion were fighter wing is to be moved to Italy. activated and deployed in Bavaria. Moreover, Ger- many hosts the US command structures for Europe and Africa (see Table 1). According to figures from 1 M.J. Lostumbo et al., Overseas Basing of U.S. Military the RAND think tank, directly or indirectly, Berlin Forces. An Assessment of Relative Costs and Strategic Benefits, RAND National Defense Research Institute, 2013, covered 33% of the cost of US forces stationed in pp. 138, www.rand.org. OSW Commentary NUMBER 348 2 In Germany, the plans announced by the Pentagon (the CSU in Bavaria, the Greens in Baden-Würt- are seen as part of the ongoing election campaign temberg, the SPD in Rhineland-Palatinate, the and as a move intended to penalise a country that CDU in Hesse), sent a letter to thirteen influential Trump dislikes and criticises for economic expan- US senators and members of Congress appealing sion and ‘freeriding’ in security policy at the US’ for the plans to reduce the military presence in expense. For this reason, the federal government Germany to be stopped, as they are highly impor- ‘took note of this decision’, and, in anticipation of tant for bilateral and transatlantic relations, for the result of the US presidential election and possi- US interests, and Europe’s security. ble changes in the plans by Biden’s administration, adopted a cautious stance2. According to German The US permanent military presence commentators the plans could backfire and harm in Poland is perceived in Germany as the US power projection in Africa and the Middle a threat to regional security. East, and on NATO’s eastern flank. Concerns have also been voiced about further harming transatlan- Among the German political parties, members of tic relations. In addition, Germany fears that it will the CDU/CSU and liberals are the most concerned become less prominent in NATO, in favour of the by the US’ decision, and emphasise that the US allies to which the withdrawn units will be moved. remains Germany’s most important partner and In Germany, a possible US permanent military ally outside of Europe. At the same time, they are presence in Poland is considered a breach of the aware of the fact that Berlin needs to invest more NATO-Russia Founding Act3 and at times a much in its own and allied security, and also strengthen greater challenge to the region’s security and to European security and defence policy. On the the cohesion of NATO than modernisation of the other hand, the chairman of the SPD parliamen- Russian Armed Forces, increase of their missile at- tary group, Rolf Mützenich, who supported in tack capabilities, aggressive exercises and or the May 2020 Germany’s withdrawal from the NATO military buildup in the Western Military District. nuclear sharing programme, sharply criticised the Trump administration, and suggested that it The German federal states see the reduced US should be called to account by cancelling plans military presence primarily in economic terms.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Theater Airlift Lessons from Kosovo
    Theater Airlift Lessons from Kosovo by Lt Col Rowayne A. Schatz, USAF This basic doctrine presents the guiding principles of our Service and our view of the opportunities of the future… As airmen, we must understand these ideas, we must cultivate them and, importantly, we must debate and refine these ideas for the future.1 General Michael E. Ryan Chief of Staff, USAF Operation Allied Force, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) military operation to compel Serbia to cease hostilities against ethnic Albanians in Kosovo and allow a peacekeeping presence on the ground, was the first major war in history fought exclusively with air power. NATO air forces flew over 38,000 sorties from 24 March through 9 June 1999 to allow NATO to achieve its political objectives in Kosovo.2 Although you may not have heard or read much about them, air mobility forces were key to the success of the air war over Serbia. The air mobility team moved enough airmen and equipment to increase the number of air expeditionary wings in Europe from three to ten, provided aid directly to thousands of Kosovar refugees, and deployed a large US Army contingent to Albania—all at the same time. In the words of Colonel Scott Gray, the USAFE Assistant Director of Operations during Operation Allied Force, "This was a phenomenal success, enabling the forces which forced Milosevic to back down while sustaining the refugees he created until they were able to go home.3 According to AFDD1, "Air and space doctrine is an accumulation of knowledge gained primarily from the study and analysis of experience, which may include actual combat or contingency operations as well as equipment tests or exercises."4 I am a firm believer that doctrine is key to warfighting.
    [Show full text]
  • Untethered Operations Rapid Mobility and Forward Basing Are Keys to Airpower’S Success in the Antiaccess/Area-Denial Environment
    Senior Leader Perspective Untethered Operations Rapid Mobility and Forward Basing Are Keys to Airpower’s Success in the Antiaccess/Area-Denial Environment Maj Gen Charles Q. Brown, Jr., USAF Brig Gen Bradley D. Spacy, USAF Capt Charles G. Glover III, USAF Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed or implied in the Journal are those of the authors and should not be construed as carry- ing the official sanction of the Department of Defense, Air Force, Air Education and Training Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US government. This article may be reproduced in whole or in part without permission. If it is reproduced, theAir and Space Power Journal requests a courtesy line. An operation incorporating “untethered” sortie generation can unleash the asymmetric advantage of US, allied, and coalition airpower. The unmatched flexibility and capacity of alliance and coalition C2, mobility, and logistic strengths can bring together the right aircraft, weapons, fuel, maintenance, and Airmen at the right place and time to create the combat power needed to win. —Gen Frank Gorenc Commander, USAFE-AFAFRICA May–June 2015 | 17 lone C-17 landed smoothly in the predawn hours at Ämari Air Base, Estonia. The C-17 was from the Heavy Airlift Wing in Pápa, Hungary. Ämari had yet to experience the devastation of a Russian air attack. The sheer number of NATO Abasing options made targeting all of them impossible and had so far kept Ämari safe. The cargo ramp was already lowering as the C-17 taxied to a stop and USAF Airmen piled out. The seemingly deserted base came alive as Airmen began organizing the ramp.
    [Show full text]
  • Restructuring the US Military Bases in Germany Scope, Impacts, and Opportunities
    B.I.C.C BONN INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR CONVERSION . INTERNATIONALES KONVERSIONSZENTRUM BONN report4 Restructuring the US Military Bases in Germany Scope, Impacts, and Opportunities june 95 Introduction 4 In 1996 the United States will complete its dramatic post-Cold US Forces in Germany 8 War military restructuring in ● Military Infrastructure in Germany: From Occupation to Cooperation 10 Germany. The results are stag- ● Sharing the Burden of Defense: gering. In a six-year period the A Survey of the US Bases in United States will have closed or Germany During the Cold War 12 reduced almost 90 percent of its ● After the Cold War: bases, withdrawn more than contents Restructuring the US Presence 150,000 US military personnel, in Germany 17 and returned enough combined ● Map: US Base-Closures land to create a new federal state. 1990-1996 19 ● Endstate: The Emerging US The withdrawal will have a serious Base Structure in Germany 23 affect on many of the communi- ties that hosted US bases. The US Impact on the German Economy 26 military’syearly demand for goods and services in Germany has fal- ● The Economic Impact 28 len by more than US $3 billion, ● Impact on the Real Estate and more than 70,000 Germans Market 36 have lost their jobs through direct and indirect effects. Closing, Returning, and Converting US Bases 42 Local officials’ ability to replace those jobs by converting closed ● The Decision Process 44 bases will depend on several key ● Post-Closure US-German factors. The condition, location, Negotiations 45 and type of facility will frequently ● The German Base Disposal dictate the possible conversion Process 47 options.
    [Show full text]
  • A Rapid Global Effects Capability
    ARapid Global Effects Capability Daniel Baltrusaitus, Major, USAF AIR UNIVERSITY AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE A Rapid Global Effects Capability daniel baltrusaitus, major, usaf Wright Flyer Paper No. 62 Air University Press Curtis E. LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama Accepted by Air University Press May 2016 and published April 2019. Project Editor Dr. Stephanie Havron Rollins Copy Editor Carolyn Broadnax Cover Art, Book Design, and Illustrations Leslie Fair Composition and Prepress Production Megan N. Hoehn AIR UNIVERSITY PRESS Director, Air University Press Lr Col Darin Gregg Air University Press Disclaimer 600 Chennault Circle, Building 1405 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-6010 implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessar- https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/AUPress/ ily represent the views of the Department of Defense, the United States Air Force, the Air Education and Training Command, the Facebook: Air University, or any other US government agency. Cleared for https://www.facebook.com/AirUnivPress public release: distribution unlimited. and This Wright Flyer Paper and others in the series are available elec- tronically at the AU Press website: https://www.airuniversity.af Twitter: https://twitter.com/aupress .edu/AUPress/Wright-Flyers/. Air University Press Contents List of Illustrations and Tables iv Foreword v Abstract vi Acknowledgments vii Purpose 1 Problem Statement 1 Thesis Statement 1 Industry Research 5 Air Force Internal Policy Implications of Development 8 USAF Wargame Results 10 Deputy Secretary of Defense Work’s Five Points of Interest and The Future 11 External Policy Implications of Development 15 Policy Implications Concerning Near- Peer Adversaries 20 Analysis 26 Recommendations 26 Notes 27 Abbreviations 31 Bibliography 32 iii List of Illustrations Figures 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 36Th Commencement Exercises Saturday, the Sixteenth of May · Two Thousand Fifteen
    Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences “Learning to Care for Those in Harm’s Way” 36th Commencement Exercises Saturday, the Sixteenth of May · Two Thousand Fifteen The Mace he mace was a weapon of war originating with the loaded club and stone Thammer of primitive man. Although it continued to be used as a weapon through the Middle Ages, during this period it also became symbolic as an ornament representing power. Sergeants-at-Arms, who were guards of kings and other high officials, carried a mace to protect their monarch during processions. By the 14th century, the mace had become more ceremonial in use and was decorated with jewels and precious metals, losing its war-club appearance. Three hundred years later, the mace was used solely as a symbol of authority. The mace is used during sessions of legislative assemblies such as the U.S. House of Representatives, where it is placed to the right of the Speaker. More frequently, maces are seen at university commencements and convocations, exemplifying knowledge as power. The USU mace was a glorious gift from the Honorable Sam Nixon, MD, past chairman of the Board of Regents, and his wife, Elizabeth. The mace was used for the first time at the 1995 commencement ceremony. It is handcrafted in sterling silver and carries the seal of the university along with the emblems of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Public Health Service. The university seal and service emblems are superimposed on the earth’s globe to symbolize the worldwide mission of the university and its graduates.
    [Show full text]
  • Report- Non Strategic Nuclear Weapons
    Federation of American Scientists Special Report No 3 May 2012 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons By HANS M. KRISTENSEN 1 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons May 2012 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons By HANS M. KRISTENSEN Federation of American Scientists www.FAS.org 2 Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons May 2012 Acknowledgments e following people provided valuable input and edits: Katie Colten, Mary-Kate Cunningham, Robert Nurick, Stephen Pifer, Nathan Pollard, and other reviewers who wish to remain anonymous. is report was made possible by generous support from the Ploughshares Fund. Analysis of satellite imagery was done with support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Image: personnel of the 31st Fighter Wing at Aviano Air Base in Italy load a B61 nuclear bomb trainer onto a F-16 fighter-bomber (Image: U.S. Air Force). 3 Federation of American Scientists www.FAS.org Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons May 2012 About FAS Founded in 1945 by many of the scientists who built the first atomic bombs, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) is devoted to the belief that scientists, engineers, and other technically trained people have the ethical obligation to ensure that the technological fruits of their intellect and labor are applied to the benefit of humankind. e founding mission was to prevent nuclear war. While nuclear security remains a major objective of FAS today, the organization has expanded its critical work to issues at the intersection of science and security. FAS publications are produced to increase the understanding of policymakers, the public, and the press about urgent issues in science and security policy.
    [Show full text]
  • BIOGRAPHICAL DATA BOO KK Pinnacle Class 2021-1 12-16 April
    BBIIOOGGRRAAPPHHIICCAALL DDAATTAA BBOOOOKK Pinnacle Class 2021-1 12-16 April 2021 Pinnacle Fellows Biographies U N I T E D S T A T E S A I R F O R C E LIEUTENANT GENERAL SAM C. BARRETT Lt. Gen. Sam C. Barrett is the Director for Logistics, Joint Staff, the Pentagon, Arlington, Virginia. As the Director for Logistics, he integrates logistics planning and execution in support of global operations and assists the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in fulfilling his responsibilities as the principal military advisor to the President and Secretary of Defense. Lt. Gen. Barrett received his commission after graduating from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1988 with a Bachelor of Science in General Studies. A command pilot with more than 4,400 hours in the C-141B, T-1A, KC-135R/T, C-40B, C-21, and C-17A, he has commanded at the squadron, wing and numbered Air Force levels. He also served as the Director of Operations, Strategic Deterrence, and Nuclear Integration at Headquarters Air Mobility Command, and the Director of the U.S. Central Command Deployment and Distribution Operations Center (CDDOC). Prior to his current assignment, Lt. Gen. Barrett was the Commander, Eighteenth Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois. Lt. Gen. Barrett is a distinguished graduate with a Master of Operational Art and Science from the Air Command and Staff College, an outstanding graduate of the Air War College, and a distinguished graduate with a Master of National Security and Strategic Studies from the Naval War College. EDUCATION 1988 Bachelor of Science, General Studies, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion of Program Goals
    Discussion of Program Goals USC DEPARTMENT OF AEROSPACE STUDIES February 2019 I NT ROD UCT I ON The United States Air Force was the last of the military services to be formed, but has evolved into the most dynamic and comprehensive fighting force on the planet, constantly innovating to meet the challenges of rapidly developing technology and changes in how war is waged. The vision for the 60th Cadet Wing is to become the program that produces strategic leaders: Cadets who will grow into senior leaders. In order to accomplish this, our mission becomes producing quality officers who are the most educated and globally-attuned. Exposing them to experiences that will help shape the way they think and collaborate in a diverse environment. Aligning with USC’s Strategic Vision, we aim to transform our ROTC program into the premier detachment by enhancing the cadet experience with special opportunities and connecting them to the world through foreign and domestic engagement. The opportunities listed in this proposal are prioritized starting with those experiences that we believe will offer the greatest benefit. Dollar figures in this proposal are based on a current enrollment of 80 cadets. Future projections are based on an enrollment goal of 150 cadets. ELEVATED TRAINING EXPERIENCES Trip to Our Nation’s Capital, Washington D.C. (for 16 cadets, 2 cadre) An opportunity to visit our nation’s seat of government will have a profound effect on their commitment to becoming the future leaders of our military. They will be able to connect to our heritage by visiting the memorials and historical places in the area, as well take a tour of the Pentagon, the Department of Defense’s main headquarters, and meet with their assigned Congressman.
    [Show full text]
  • GENERAL TOD D. WOLTERS Commander, U.S
    GENERAL TOD D. WOLTERS Commander, U.S. European Command Gen. Tod D. Wolters is Commander, U.S. European Command and NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR). He is responsible for one of two U.S. forward-deployed geographic combatant commands whose area of focus spans across Europe, portions of Asia and the Middle East, the Arctic and Atlantic oceans. The command is comprised of more than 60,000 military and civilian personnel and is responsible for U.S. defense operations and relations with NATO and 51 countries. As SACEUR, he is one of NATO's two strategic commanders and commands Allied Command Operations (ACO), which is responsible for the planning and execution of all Alliance operations. He is responsible to NATO's Military Committee for the conduct of all NATO military operations. Gen. Wolters received his commission in 1982 as a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. He has commanded the 19th Fighter Squadron, the 1st Operations Group, the 485th Air Expeditionary Wing, the 47th Flying Training Wing, the 325th Fighter Wing, the 9th Air and Space Expeditionary Task Force-Afghanistan, and the 12th Air Force. He has fought in operations Desert Storm, Southern Watch, Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. The general has also served in the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, as Director of Legislative Liaison and in Headquarters staff positions at U.S. Pacific Command, Headquarters U.S. Air Force and Air Force Space Command. Prior to assuming his current position, the general served as Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe; Commander, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Hangar Digest Is a Publication of Th E Air Mobility Command Museum Foundation , Inc
    THE HANGAR DIGEST IS A PUBLICATION OF TH E AIR MOBILITY COMMAND MUSEUM FOUNDATION , INC. V OLUME 6, ISSUE 1 Hangar Digest J ANUARY 2006 INSIDE THIS ISSUE: From the Editor From the Director 2 Meet the Volunteer 3 MATS’ Atlantic Div. 4 In 1948, the Military Air Transport Ser- Airlifts Remembered 6 vice began operations with three divi- sions: the Pacific, Continental and the Hall of Heroes 7 Atlantic. In a 1958 reorganization, the Name the Plane 9 Continental Division was transferred from Kelly AFB to Travis AFB where it Around the Bases 10 joined the Pacific Division to become Headquarters, Western Transport Air Force, or WESTAF. The Atlantic Divi- sion at McGuire AFB became Head- quarters Eastern Transport Air Force, or EASTAF. In this issue, I offer a short insight into the mis- sion of the Atlantic Division. LOOKING An optional requirement for the award of the Boy Scout Avia- BACK tion Merit Badge is a visit to an aviation museum. Scout lead- A new world’s re- ers are now bringing their troops to the AMC Museum for in- cord for weight struction on aircraft terminology, the function of various in- dropped by para- struments and the principals of flight. For virtual flight in- chute was set re- struction, we now have a flight simulator with interactive cently by the Air Force’s 6511th Test cockpits equipped with tunable radios, operable aircraft con- Group (Parachute). trols and weather themes. Its program is Microsoft’s Flight Using six 130-foot Simulator 2004 with many added airlift and tanker aircraft in- nylon chutes, a cluding the C-124, C-133, C-9 and the KC-97.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe
    Text U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe A Review of Post-Cold War Policy, Force Levels, and War Planning Prepared by Hans M. Kristensen Natural Resources Defense Council February 2005 About the Author Hans M. Kristensen is an independent nuclear weapons policy analyst who has spent the last 20 years researching nuclear weapons policy and operations. He specializes in using the Freedom of Information Act to obtain declassified documents and is a consultant to the nuclear program at the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington D.C. Kristensen is the co-author of the bi- monthly NRDC Nuclear Notebook in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists and writes the World Nuclear Forces appendix to the SIPRI Yearbook. His other publications are available on his web site at http://www.nukestrat.com. Acknowledgments This report builds upon the extensive research conducted by independent analysts in the United States and Europe over the past several decades. Deciphering the infrastructure of nuclear operations is difficult and time consuming but a necessary and important task. My research and writing for this report was conducted with the generous support from the Ploughshares Fund. Robert S. Norris, Thomas B. Cochran, Alexandra Kennaugh, Elliott Negin and Alistair Millar provided much needed editorial assistance. Matthew McKinzie did his magic with maps and satellite images. Further Information A copy of this report (PDF color) and the individual color satellite images from Appendix C are available on the NRDC web site at http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/euro/contents.asp © Hans M. Kristensen / Natural Resources Defense Council, 2005 1200 New York Avenue, N.E., Suite 400 Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]