The NATO summit promises to be difficult: the Poles are ready to go against the Germans.
As you know, in each self-respecting general staff in safes are sealed packages with pre-designed action plans for all occasions. Including the most incredible, like the landing of aliens or the end of the world. In fact, it's not like that much of a joke. As a rule, the most acute deficit in any emergency is the time to sit down and calmly think. So even the worst plan is usually much better than none at all.
However, behind it (a joke) is not rarely trying to hide the real processes that do not want to make public or that could not be saved from leakage. An example is the analytical article in The Washington Post, the authors of which speak about the activation in the Pentagon of works on the analysis of the cost and consequences of the withdrawal of the US Army from Germany. Officials of the Pentagon, the facts mentioned in it, are not so completely denied as referring to the naturalness of military planning for the most varied variants of the development of events. Like, nothing much happens, just financial management analyzes the structure and amount of current spending in order to find options for their optimization. An explanation could be accepted, if not for a number of indirect signs, which testify to the contrary.
As already known, Germany in the upcoming 10-15 years to increase its military spending, of course, plans, but they definitely will not reach the level required by Washington in the 2% of the runway. In addition, this money will go, first of all, to renew the technical park, which in the majority consists of arms of European manufacture. So, from the US military-industrial complex, nothing substantial will perish from them.
20 June 2018 held a visit to the US Defense Minister of Germany Ursula von der Leyen any major changes in the current state of affairs before the upcoming NATO summit in Brussels did not bring. Washington needs extra money. Receive them Trump wants by increasing the share of military expenditure in European countries at least to the notorious "two percent."
However, instead, he does not receive anything. Not only that, unlike Japan, Germany covers only a third of the cost of maintaining the US military contingent on its territory, so it does so not in cash, but in kind, that is, free allocation of land for facilities, provision of infrastructure and provision other similar needs.
Thus, Trump and the United States, in general, find themselves trapped in an almost impasse. Declaring the responsibility of the Europeans to pay for American protection, the owner of the White House thereby hinted that he would not intend to protect Europe without money. Thus, creating a difficult dilemma: how to react further, if the Germans do not concede. The option of ignoring the refusal bears enormous, even fatal, consequences for the geopolitical influence of the United States. The leader, allowing to ignore his demands, very quickly ceases to be a leader, and this is the basis for the lion's share of America's economic prosperity.
As for the lion, it's not just a beautiful turn of speech. More than half of the current income of American business and budget is directly tied to the dominance of the dollar in world finance and American corporations in foreign markets. The reduction of these revenues threatens to break the social contract, and, consequently, the risk of the collapse of the US as a federal state. This for one day, of course, does not happen, but the trend of other options will not leave.
On the other hand, if you can not stay and can not leave at the same time, then the Pentagon must look for variants of any rebase that allows you to save your face. This is probably the reason for the increased activity of analysts in assessing the cost of leaving Germany.
The public initiative of Warsaw, with a proposal to donate two billion dollars to Washington for the deployment of the US base in Poland, proves that this is also indirect. Profit Poles here is completely transparent. Turning into the key and practically the only Pentagon base in Europe (meaning as the main rear area with key infrastructure elements, and not just the barracks location) means that those 70% of the money spent on maintenance of the foreign contingent that used to go to Germany, now they will go to Poland.
It is naive to expect that economically inferior to the Germans in 7,7 times, the Poles will agree to pay all expenses entirely at their own expense. In Washington, this point is understood, so the Pentagon refused the Polish proposal, while the State Department uses it as a bargaining chip in Berlin, hinting at America's technical ability to "leave."
Presumably, allowing such a leak, the administration of Trump expected from Germans and Europeans in general, full and unconditional surrender, but received directly the opposite result. The European Union not only was not frightened, but even amicably proclaimed the official start of the formation of its own EU army, completely separate from NATO. Objectively, the Europeans have great difficulties with it, but formally, on paper, this decision can parry the American argument about the importance and necessity of preserving the Alliance for ensuring European security.
Now everything depends on the outcome of the Brussels Summit of the North Atlantic bloc, which will take place in a week. In the current scenario, it can not be ruled out that plans for the withdrawal of contingent from Germany to the Pentagon may not be required at all theoretically.