US Mulls Pulling a Third of Its Troops Out of Europe – What It Could Mean

The Pentagon is reportedly putting together a set of options that could see as many as 20,000‑plus American soldiers leave the continent. It’s not a spur‑of‑the‑moment idea; senior officials say the draft will land on Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s desk in the next few days.

Why now? Europe’s NATO partners have turned their backs on a request to let US jets use their bases for a planned strike on Iran. In the eyes of Washington, that refusal is “shameful” – a phrase Hegseth himself used at a NATO gathering in Brussels, lamenting that allies were putting American service members at risk by denying predictable access.

What could the pull‑back look like? One scenario floated by NBC is a modest cut – about one‑third of the roughly 68,000 troops stationed across Germany, Italy and Spain. A harsher alternative would see up to 40,000 personnel, along with aircraft, ships and weapon systems, shipped home.

There’s also a middle‑ground idea: rather than a wholesale exit, the US could shuffle units from central and western bases to NATO’s eastern flank, edging them closer to the Russian border. The exact mix will likely hinge on where Washington thinks the biggest strategic gaps lie.

It’s not the first time the US has trimmed its European footprint. Last year, about half of the 2,000 troops in Romania were pulled back, and a further 5,000 are in the process of leaving Germany after Chancellor Friedrich Merz publicly slammed the prospect of an American‑led strike on Iran.

What would this mean for Europe? Analysts say the biggest shock‑wave would be to the nuclear deterrence posture that the US has long provided. “Moscow would certainly see a win,” notes Ian Lesser of the German Marshall Fund, though he cautions that the impact depends on which units are moved and when.

Some European capitals may be less rattled if the redeployment heads east, where Germany and France are already boosting their own capabilities. Still, the symbolic loss of a visible American presence could embolden Kremlin narratives about a waning NATO resolve.

U.S. lawmakers are not thrilled either. Senators Roger Wicker and Rep. Mike Rogers warned that a large‑scale pull‑out could send the “wrong signal” to President Vladimir Putin, potentially encouraging further aggression.

The backdrop to all this is a broader souring of trans‑Atlantic ties. Former President Trump has repeatedly complained that Europe leans too heavily on U.S. defense spending, urging allies to hit a 5 % GDP defence‑budget target – a goal many still can’t meet. Add to that Europe’s refusal to let the US use its bases for the Iran‑Israel conflict, a 15 % tariff war on EU goods, and a brief, heated dispute over Greenland, and the relationship looks more strained than ever.

Regardless of the final decision – slated for early November – the conversation has already sparked a fresh debate about Europe’s own defence burden, NATO’s future, and how the Atlantic alliance can stay credible when the political winds shift.