No reason for troop cutback
Are 100,000 American troops in Asia one too many? This question, raised at the start of President Bill Clinton's second term by his new Pentagon chief, is something that must cause concern among U.S. allies in Asia. American troops, mostly stationed in Japan and South Korea, have since the Second World War become a symbol of U.S. commitment to maintaining peace and stability in an often troubled area.
America's military presence, not just a token force, is needed in Asia to keep the peace. It serves America's interests to demonstrate its commitment unequivocally, and this can only be achieved by putting money where the mouth is. The 100,000 U.S. troops deployed in Asia have become a symbol of that commitment. Any cutback when there is no palpable reason to do so can only be seen as a diminution of Washington's interest, if not retreat to isolationism. To be credible, America cannot be the world's sole superpower on the cheap.
America's allies were surprised when the commander of the U.S. forces in the Pacific, Admiral Joseph Prueher, disclosed that new Defense Secretary William Cohen was rethinking the worldwide deployment of American troops. Were there new reasons to do this, when his predecessor William Perry had said only two months ago that Asian deployment was not being questioned?
President Clinton declared in a speech to the Australian Parliament last December: "We will maintain about 100,000 troops across the Pacific, just as we maintain about 100,000 troops in Europe. We share the view of almost every nation in Asia that a strong American security presence is a bedrock for regional stability."
Why then is the Pentagon talking about a possible troop cutback in Asia? Cohen has spoken about the necessity to maintain America's forward military presence because of its strategic and economic interests. If this is understood to mean that the U.S. has to go beyond tokenism in order to be taken seriously, he should not end up cutting the Pacific forces. Any back down at this stage is bound to send the wrong signals, and suggest an inward-looking Pentagon. Any talk of flagging U.S. interest in Asia at the start of Clinton's final term will be bad for America and its allies. And any cutback will be hard to replace in an age of budget deficits.
-- The Straits Times, Singapore