How to Alienate an Ally

When the United States was attacked on 9/11 Romania had not yet joined NATO. But the Bush administration had invoked NATO’s Article 5, which means an attack on one is an attack on all. It was the first, and only, time so far that Article 5 has been invoked in the Alliance’s 76-year history.

Romania quickly responded to America’s call for help and in 2002, as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, Romania deployed an infantry battalion and a nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare company to Kandahar.

In 2004 Romania joined NATO and soon proved itself a strong ally of the U.S. and NATO, deploying troops for operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Kosovo. The country is located in a strategic part of Europe, on the shores of the Black Sea, and its Mihail Kogălniceanu (MK) airport is a major transit hub for allied missions. It also hosts a key element of the Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) missile defense effort for NATO.

So, it came as a shock to supporters of Romania on October 29, when the Trump administration announced that U.S. soldiers on rotation in Romania with the 2nd Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, will return to the U.S. and will not be replaced.

The Pentagon hastened to assure everyone that “this is not an American withdrawal from Europe or a signal of lessened commitment to NATO.” It was instead, they claimed, a sign that Europe is following President Donald Trump’s demand that Europe be responsible for its own defense. The Romanian defense minister, in a laconic statement, agreed that pulling 700 airborne troops (out of 1,700) from Romania is not a “withdrawal.” When reporters asked President Trump about the decision, he brushed it off: “It’s not very significant, it’s not a, not a big deal.”

I read the news about the troops withdrawal just as I returned from a trip to Eastern Europe, including Romania.

Anyone who follows national security news knows that the Trump administration now is shifting focus from Europe to the Western Hemisphere and the Indo-Pacific. Many observers of Russia and Europe call the shift short-sighted, when Russia – with the help of its allies (China, Iran, and North Korea) – is waging not only a full-scale war against Ukraine, but a hybrid war against Europe.

Yes, President Trump says he is trying to bring the Ukraine war to an end, but is pulling troops out of Eastern Europe a good move if you are trying to pressure Putin into stopping his war?

As RUSI (the Royal United Services Institute) (https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/us-troop-cuts-natos-eastern-flank) explains:

“(Romania) has the longest border with Ukraine of any NATO ally and hosts a major training hub for Ukrainian pilots. The deployment of the 101st Airborne Division to the Mihail Kogǎlniceanu (MK) base in southeast Romania was not just the first time this storied unit had returned to Europe since World War Two. It also brought them closer to the war in Ukraine than most other U.S Army units. Not far is Russian-occupied Crimea, one of the most heavily militarised parts of Europe. Another of the three US bases in Romania is Deveselu. It hosts NATO’s missile defence system, which matters to the whole alliance and has been the target of repeated Russian threats.”

As RUSI notes, two top Republican lawmakers, the chairs of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, have criticized the decision to remove U.S. troops from 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, 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 aggressive actions.”

As more details of the pull-out were reported, I messaged a colleague of mine in Bucharest, a journalist focusing on national security issues. “This is the worst step in Romania-U.S. relations since we joined NATO in 2004,” he quickly messaged back. “Romania has a war on north/east border (Ukraine and Black Sea), and Russia has launched “Phase Zero” of the hybrid war on NATO Eastern Flank. Any reconfiguration of US troops size is a wrong message to Putin. We need more U.S. troops, not less.”

He also recalled Romania’s immediate response to come to the aid of the U.S. when it was attacked in 2001. “When the U.S. was at war, Romania acted as de-facto NATO member in 2002. We have sent troops to Afghanistan and Iraq. More than 30 troops died in the war on terrorism. Now, when Romania has a war on the border and Russia is acting aggressively, the Trump administration took two decisions that hit Romania in the belly: out of Visa Waiver and withdrawing the U.S. brigade in MK.”

On January 9 of this year, the Biden administration designated Romania as a Visa Waiver Program (VWP) country. Romanians traveling to the U.S. no longer had to obtain U.S. visas. But in May, under President Trump, the Department of Homeland Security rescinded that designation. The reason: “to protect the integrity of the VWP and to ensure border and immigration security.”

The announcement noted that “Romania may be reconsidered for VWP designation in the future should they meet the statutory eligibility criteria.”

Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security, Tricia McLaughlin, added a note of thanks: “We are grateful for Romania’s close partnership over the years to enhance security cooperation. Romania may be reconsidered for VWP admission in the future.”

My Bucharest colleague was not impressed with her generosity: “Very unfriendly and un-allied spirit.”