Maintaining a robust US presence in Europe is “essential to defending American interests,” Maj. Gen. “Skip” Davis says.
“A large-scale withdrawal would make US power projection slower, costlier, and less effective,” warned Davis, a non-resident senior fellow at CEPA, former deputy chief of staff for operations and intelligence at NATO’s Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe and director of operations at US European Command. He cautions that a drawdown could embolden Russia and China.
CEPA: What is the value of US basing in Europe?
Davis: US military forces and bases in Europe are a long-standing, strategic investment that serve national defense and broader US global interests. Forward-deployed forces and infrastructure contribute significantly to regional stability, global reach, and national security. While US bases in the Indo-Pacific and Middle East are important, European basing offers distinct strategic advantages. A significant withdrawal would likely be viewed by Russia and China as an opportunity to weaken US influence — posing a risk to American and allied interests.
CEPA: What are the strategic objectives of US bases in Europe, both on the continent and beyond?
Davis: In Europe, US bases — particularly in countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Italy, and Romania — deter aggression, especially from Russia. They reassure allies under NATO’s Article 5 and enable rapid response via land, air, or sea due to geographic proximity to potential crises.
Globally, European bases serve as launch points for operations across the Middle East, Africa, and Central Asia. They support global logistics, airlift, and refueling, making sustained US military presence feasible. Many house critical intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, essential for global awareness. These bases also offer joint and multinational training that boosts coalition interoperability — a necessity for global missions.
US forces in Europe provide operational flexibility and long-term engagement options across regions. Their presence supports diplomacy, fosters public support for US involvement, and enhances influence in institutions like NATO and the EU.
Beyond defending Europe, US forces in Europe directly support homeland security. Positioned as a forward line of defense, they enable early warning and reduce the distance between emerging threats and the US ISR capabilities based in Europe, [which] improve reaction time and defense posture.
Europe’s location — at the intersection of Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia — makes it ideal for rapid deployment in all directions. US Army stocks and Navy sustainment capabilities in Spain, Italy, and Greece lower the time and cost of mobilization. Key air bases like Ramstein (Germany), Aviano and Sigonella (Italy), and Mihail Kogălniceanu (Romania) support rapid global response.
Basing in Europe extends US defense outward, allowing proactive shaping of global security. It enhances partnerships, strategic deterrence, and regional stability.
Europe hosts the most developed US alliance network, with shared command and logistics structures. This strengthens NATO, supports Israel, and bolsters regional partners’ defenses. A European forward presence means our allies are more likely to share the burden in future conflicts.
Strategic deterrence is reinforced through a permanent or rotational presence. It signals to adversaries that aggression will meet a swift, coordinated response. Several European nations host US nuclear weapons and provide dual-capable aircraft, reinforcing nuclear deterrence under NATO.
Additionally, these bases help prevent regional conflict and support counterterrorism. The US presence contributes to stability in tense regions like the Balkans, the Aegean, and the Black Sea. Their rapid response capability deters crises from escalating. Bases also serve as hubs for missions targeting transnational terrorist threats that could impact the US directly.
CEPA: How would Russia and China interpret a US withdrawal from Europe?
Davis: A significant US military drawdown from Europe would likely be interpreted by Russia and China as a strategic opportunity.
Russia would likely view it as a weakening of US commitment to NATO and a chance to expand its influence in Central and Eastern Europe. This could embolden Russia to increase military pressure on vulnerable NATO members or non-members like Moldova or Georgia. Hybrid warfare — cyber-attacks, disinformation, and political subversion — would likely intensify. With diminished fear of US reaction, Russia could build up forces near NATO’s borders or in Kaliningrad and increase naval activity in the Atlantic or Mediterranean.
China would likely interpret the withdrawal as a retreat from US global leadership. It would exploit the perceived power vacuum to present itself as a stable, alternative global partner. Using tools like foreign investment, technology, and trade — especially in Southern and Eastern Europe — China would aim to deepen its foothold. It may expand diplomatic and potentially even military presence in countries where it already has strategic ties. China would likely use this moment to drive wedges within NATO and the EU, especially targeting economically vulnerable nations.
CEPA: What would the United States lose by pulling back from Europe?
Davis: US military bases and forces in Europe are a cornerstone of US national security, regional deterrence, and global influence. A large-scale withdrawal would make US power projection slower, costlier, and less effective. It would diminish US credibility, hinder crisis prevention, and embolden Russia and China to fill the void.
Interview conducted by Mila Tanghe of CEPA’s editorial staff.
Mila Tanghe attended Columbia University and is currently an Intern with the Editorial team at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
War Without End
Russia’s Shadow Warfare
CEPA Forum 2025
Explore CEPA’s flagship event.
