Should the US Military Maintain a Global Presence?

The question of whether the United States military should maintain a global presence is fundamental to understanding American foreign policy and national security strategy. This article will explore this topic in depth, considering the historical and contemporary reasons for such a presence, the feasibility and implications of a more localized force, and the role of the military in international relations.

Historical and Contemporary Context

The United States has long maintained a global military presence as a cornerstone of its foreign policy. One of the key rationales for this is the principle of Freedom of the Seas. This concept not only pertains to open navigation rights but also extends to freedom of commerce and the free flow of resources, which are essential to the economic vitality of the United States and its allies. Without a "prosperous" world, America's own prosperity becomes untenable.

Global Prosperity and Military Advocacy

Global prosperity has been a consistent feature in the American success story. For the US to thrive, other nations must also prosper. This interconnectedness underscores the importance of the US military presence around the world. The ability to project power and ensure safety and stability in strategic regions is a critical aspect of maintaining global prosperity.

The Role of Different Military Branches

An important point to consider is the division of responsibilities within different branches of the military. In reality, the Navy and Marine Expeditionary Units, along with Special Operations Forces (SOF), are the primary forces tasked with maintaining global maritime freedom. For example, the Navy is equipped to handle missions such as naval patrols, anti-piracy operations, and humanitarian aid.

For conventional and non-combat roles, the US Army and USAF can play a significant role in regions closer to home bases, such as along the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) in Korea. Additionally, units like the 173rd Airborne Brigade, stationed in Italy, can provide a quick response capability. However, the majority of the active personnel should remain in the states, ready to be deployed as needed.

Opinion on Global vs. Local Military Presence

The debate over whether the US military should maintain a global presence is multifaceted. One perspective is that the military's role should be more focused on homeland security and defense against immediate national threats. Supporting this view, the US has military elements on all seven continents, indicating a broad but not necessarily overwhelming global presence.

Some argue that the US military should be the world's primary responder to crises, both literal and figurative. However, this approach often overlooks the geopolitics and strategic complexities that come with such an expansive role. Deploying service members to conflicts that do not directly involve the United States or its interests can create long-term obligations and compromises of national sovereignty.

The Composition of the US Military

A significant concern regarding the US military's global presence is the inclusion of foreign personnel. The argument against this practice is the need for a force that is primarily composed of US servicemembers. These individuals are accountable to the US public and to the orders of the Commander in Chief. It is important to maintain the integrity and sovereignty of the United States military by ensuring that it remains an institution that serves the interests of the American people.

While the US military has operated in combined environments with allied partners throughout its history, it typically acts in support of these coalitions rather than leading them unilaterally. A US officer may be appointed the Supreme Allied Commander during a conflict, but the coalition partners, including nations like Germany and the UK, retain their own autonomy and rules.

Conclusion

The question of the US military's global presence is complex and carries significant implications for national security, foreign policy, and international relations. While the US has a strong case for maintaining a global military presence, it is essential to consider the risks and responsibilities that come with such a commitment. Ultimately, a balanced approach that prioritizes homeland security and strategic interests while maintaining the integrity of the US military will be most effective in achieving long-term stability and prosperity.