Escalating his confrontation with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, . However, as Politico comments, the distance of a social media post from the realization of a walkout is long as it requires years of planning and costs billions of dollars.
The reason for the Trump-Mertz feud
The controversy erupted when he went on Monday to , claiming that the Iranian leadership is “humiliating” the United States in the conflict. Mertz also said that Washington appears to lack a clear strategy, expressing doubts about how it can emerge from the crisis.
Following the standoff, the US president announced on Wednesday that his administration is considering reducing US troops in Germany. “The United States is studying and reviewing the potential reduction of troops in Germany, with a decision to be made in the next short period of time,” Trump wrote on Thursday.
Trump’s sharp-tongued attack
The US president called on Mertz to “focus on ending the Russia-Ukraine war”, describing him as “completely ineffective” in managing it, as well as dealing with “the internal problems of his broken country, especially immigration and energy”.
In his post, Trump argued that the German chancellor was spending too much time “interfering” in issues related to dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat, adding that US actions make the world and Germany safer.
The Mertz response and transatlantic cooperation
On Thursday and ahead of Trump’s new post, the German chancellor attempted to tone down the situation, underscoring Germany’s close military cooperation with the United States. Speaking at the German army’s armored training school in the northern city of Münster, Merz highlighted the strong operational ties with the US military.
“We are working here, but also in other key locations in Germany, side by side with the United States and our NATO allies,” Mertz said, noting the joint training and cooperation with American forces. “This work is carried out side by side, for mutual benefit and in the context of deep transatlantic cooperation,” he added.
In another statement, Mertz avoided directly addressing Trump’s threats: “Our compass remains clearly set on a strong NATO and a credible transatlantic partnership.”
The importance of German bases to the US
About 36,000 US troops are currently stationed in Germany, about half of Washington’s total military presence in Europe. The country is home to dozens of US installations, including the top US commands for Europe and Africa, and also has critical military assets, including B-61 nuclear bombs.
“Such a withdrawal would require long-term planning and entail significant costs,” said German liberal lawmaker Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, who chairs the European Parliament’s defense committee. “The United States relies on this location, especially with regard to operations in the Middle East.”
Legal limits and practical obstacles
During his first term, Trump ordered the withdrawal of 12,000 US troops from Germany, but was unable to complete it before President Joe Biden took office.
The only concrete limit that exists today is a 2025 law that prevents the president from leaving fewer than 76,000 troops in Europe. With up to 85,000 troops on the continent right now, this gives it a legal maximum withdrawal of 9,000 troops.
Even that scenario would take “at least four years” and could cost “hundreds of billions” of dollars when indirect costs are factored in, said retired Gen. Mark Hertling, a former commander of U.S. Army Europe who helped manage a major U.S. withdrawal between 2003 and 2011.
Operational costs and the war against Iran
As Hertling argued, the real costs don’t stop at military movements. It includes moving thousands of military families, laying off German workers, closing hospitals and abandoning newly upgraded bases.
A swift withdrawal would also be “extremely damaging” to the US military campaign in Iran, as bases such as Ramstein play an important role in coordinating drone strikes and sending personnel and equipment to the Middle East.
“Where would they go? You need infrastructure, you need bases, you need housing — that doesn’t just exist somewhere else and wait,” noted Claudia Major, senior vice president for transatlantic security at the German Marshall Fund.
The impact on European defence
Any sudden withdrawal could undermine Europe’s defense against Russia, at a time when fears are mounting that Moscow could attack a European country by the end of the decade.
“It would weaken NATO’s deterrent posture, as it would show Vladimir Putin that the Americans care less every day, that Europe is more and more exposed,” said Gerlinde Nychus, a security expert and former NATO official.
A senior NATO diplomat commented: “If they look at where they could best use their forces in Europe, I don’t think it’s unreasonable. If they do it out of a vengeful desire to punish allies, then it would not be wise.”
Trump has also threatened other countries that do not follow his line on Iran, including the United Kingdom and Spain, but so far this has not led to a change in their military relationship with Washington.
