An American general who was involved in the development of the rotational forces at the bases in Câmpia Turzii and Mihail Kogălniceanu strongly criticizes the withdrawal of US troops from Romania. He emphasizes that this decision reverses a strategic arc that took many years to build and is a dangerously clear sign of drift.
Last week, the Trump administration made two major announcements regarding national security that, taken together, only highlight a small part of its inconsistency.
First, the Secretary of Defense announced that US forces will be withdrawn from the bases in Romania - bases that anchor NATO's southeastern flank and project stability in the Black Sea region - because, as Pentagon officials stated, America needs to "focus again on defending the country" and "prepare for a future confrontation with China."
- Trump withdraws hundreds of American troops from Romania. Explanation from the Ministry of Defense
- The withdrawal from Romania is just the first step. The Trump administration reduces troops also from Bulgaria, Hungary, and Slovakia - a total of 3,000 American soldiers are leaving
- Trump on reducing troops in Romania: "It's not a big deal"
Then, just a few hours later, the President wrote on social media that US forces may need to be sent to Nigeria to "protect persecuted Christians."
A Decision Disconnected from Reality
As confusing and shocking as these statements may have been individually, together they imply something much more dangerous: a chaotic process of national security that oscillates from one impulse to another, uncorrelated with a strategy, an alliance, or reality.
You do not strengthen the homeland by withdrawing from Europe's outposts. You do not deter China by announcing a religiously defined military intervention in Africa. And certainly, you do not project global leadership by allowing strategic impact to replace long-term planning, as highlighted in an article published in The Bulwark by retired Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, former commander of US forces in Europe from 2011 to 2012.
He points out that the withdrawal from Romania should not simply be viewed as a geographic adjustment: this decision reverses a strategic arc that took many years to build.
A Success Story Destroyed by Trump
The American general was involved in the development of the Joint Task Force-East, a planned rotational military presence at the "Turzii" (Câmpia Turzii) and "MK" (Mihail Kogălniceanu) bases. He writes that both military bases in Romania were designed and rebuilt to meet the requirements of a significant American contingent presence, as part of a decade-long effort to strengthen the US and NATO posture along Eastern Europe's flank.
These strategic locations were long planned, designed as part of the transformation of US forces in Europe from 2004 to 2011, built to complement the forces permanently stationed in Germany and Italy with rotation capacity in Romania, notes Hertling.
Some voices within the administration suggested, following the announcement, that the withdrawal of forces from Romania only brings back the US position in Europe to the pre-large-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia. However, this approach is deceptive. These forces were never intended for "permanent stationing"; they were designed for rotation, allowing quick adaptation to emerging threats.
After Russia's invasion of Ukraine, this flexibility proved vital as it allowed the United States and NATO to move eastward, reassure allies, and respond to Russian aggression without renegotiating bases or improvising logistics in crisis situations.
Eliminating this capacity now is not a neutral reset but destroys one of the success stories of allied deterrence, whose value has been proven, the general highlights.
The Most Capable Military in the World, an Instrument of Caprice
Beyond tactical and operational dynamics lies a deeper contradiction. After the announcement of troops leaving Romania, the Washington administration signaled that its National Defense Strategy will focus on internal security and then address issues related to China.
Part of this shift apparently includes considering the dissolution of the US Africa Command (AFRICOM) - headquartered in Germany, tasked with building partnerships and managing operations on the African continent.
The idea of eliminating AFRICOM while simultaneously suggesting a deployment in Nigeria is not a strategy; it is chaotic improvisation. It shows a government reacting to headlines and not shaping national security.
The general mentions that when in the military, no commander ever promised "we can do this" before conducting a mission analysis - the disciplined process of defining objectives, identifying means, assessing risks, and determining feasibility.
The duty of a Secretary of Defense is to insist on this process, not to shorten it. The Secretary's response, "Yes, sir," to Trump's social media post regarding a mission in Nigeria may seem loyal but is the opposite of leadership. It replaces reason with obedience and turns the most capable military in the world into an instrument of caprice, endangering America's sons and daughters, warns the former commander of US forces in Europe.
Evidence of America's Drift
A foreign policy that withdraws from Romania while threatening deployment in Nigeria is not a grand strategy; it is a way of making waves on the world stage: weakening NATO, confusing allies on other continents, encouraging adversaries, and undermining the seriousness of both diplomats and military forces, according to Hertling.
The United States remains the indispensable nation globally, but this characteristic requires discipline and coordinated strength.
However, what the Trump administration is doing is evidence of drift. And drift, when it comes to war and peace, is the most dangerous, concludes the American general.