For almost 75 years, it has been a clearly American responsibility that a four -star general in the United States supervises all NATO military operations in Europe, a command that began with the then hero of World War II and the future President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
But the Trump administration, according to two defense officials familiar with planning and an informative session of the Pentagon reviewed by NBC News, is considering changing that.
The Pentagon is undertaking a significant restructuring of the commandments and the headquarters of the American army combatants. And one of the plans under consideration, said the two defense officials, would involve the United States to renounce the role of the Supreme Commander of NATO, Europe, known within military language such as Soteur. The general now in this role, which also serves as head of the American European Command, has been the main commander who supervises Ukraine support in his war against Russia. It is not clear how long such reorganization could take, and it could be modified by the moment it is complete. Congress could also evaluate, using the power of the bag if the members oppose any aspect of the initiative.
Giving up Soteur would be, if nothing else, an important symbolic change in the balance of power in NATO, the alliance that has defined European security and peace since World War II.
“For the United States to abandon the role of Supreme NATO ally commander, it would be seen in Europe as a significant sign of moving away from the alliance,” the retired admirer James Stavridis said in an email, who served as a European command from 2009 to 2013, in an email.
“It would be a political error of the epic proportion, and once we deliver it, they will not return it,” he wrote. “We would lose a huge amount of influence within NATO, and this would be seen, correctly, as probably the first step to leave the alliance completely.”
Since Eisenhower inaugurated the position, it has been occupied by some of the most outstanding military leaders in the country. In addition to Stavridis, they include Alexander Haig, who was also head of personnel of two presidents and secretary of state for a third; John Shalikashvili, who became president of the team leaders; and Wesley Clark, who was a candidate for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.
The proposed restructuring occurs when the Trump administration has reduced spending and personnel throughout the federal government. And President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have made it clear that the new administration wants European partners to assume more responsibility for the defense of Europe. If the United States renounces Sandeur, NATO’s other nations would probably have to choose between them which country would present to the commander.
Trump has repeatedly criticized NATO members for not fulfilling a goal that the alliance has established for the percentage of GDP that each country should spend in defense. As NBC News previously reported, it is also considering an important policy change under which the United States may not defend an NATO member if it is attacked, a central principle of the alliance, if the country does not meet the defense spending threshold.
The timeline for the Sandeur movement, if it happens, is still undetermined. Army general Chris Cavoli, the current Soteur, is on a three -year tour that ends this summer.
Five of the 11 combatant commands of the army could consolidate under the plan that is being discussed, the two defense officials familiar with planning said.
The Defense Department did not respond to a request for comments.
The mass restructuring plan in consideration could also include two potential changes previously reported by NBC News: the consolidation of the European United States Command and the United States Africa Command in a Command based in Stuttgart, Germany, as well as the closure of the headquarters of the southern command of the US.
The combination of the commands would allow the military to save money by reducing staff with overlapping responsibilities, according to officials familiar with planning. If all the changes that are being considered, up to $ 270 million, may be saved in the first year, according to information about the Pentagon reviewed by NBC News. This saving would be equivalent to approximately 0.03% of the annual budget of $ 850 billion of the Department of Defense.
A possible reorganization of this nature, considered two months after the administration, seems to be motivated by cost reduction, not a new integral military strategy, said Ben Hodges, a general -army general from the three -star army that served as the last time as the main commander of the army in Europe.
The movements contemplated in Europe can reduce American influence there, since the United States could lose some access to key and air bases in Italy, Germany, Poland and Spain, bases that benefit the United States when they bring them closer to potential missions and give them more influence and access to regional military officials, not just their allies, Hodges said.
“When you start reducing the capacities of the headquarters that plan and intelligence, that just hurts us,” Hodges told NBC News. “What strategic analysis led them to want to do this?
Combining commands in Europe and Africa could be problematic because the regions are too massive and present innumerable problems, Stavridis said in an email. They had combined until the African command was created in 2007 under then President George W. Bush for these reasons.
“Combining the European Command of the United States and the United States Africa Command in a single unit, creates a mega combatant command that really is too large for anyone alone to manage realistically,” he wrote. “Too many countries, too many people, too many disparate issues.
But Stavridis, who is also the former commander of the South Command, added that he believes that combining the South Command and the North Command “makes a lot of sense.”
“The control section is smaller and the efficiencies obtained are greater,” he said.
If the Pentagon decides to combine Africom and Euchom in a single command, that will be part of the justification to eliminate the role of Sandeur, the two defense officials said, because supervising such a large area is already a work large enough for a person without also supervising NATO military operations.
The closure of the geographical commands introduces the political risk, since some nations may feel that the United States has depressed them. It also leaves the combatant commanders with large geographical areas of responsibility that could make them more vulnerable, according to the pentagon information that NBC News reviewed.
Cost savings plans also potentially include hundreds of joint employees based in the pentagon to a military installation in Suffolk, Virginia. The joint staff is currently composed of eight directives or divisions, each with a different approach area.
J7, a joint management of the personnel that supervises the development, training and education of the joint force, could be completely eliminated. While military services, the Army, the Navy, Los Marines, the Air Force, the Space Force and the Coast Guard, are responsible for their own training, that direction is in charge of gathering the services to train so that they are ready to integrate into a combat situation.
Approximately 375 civilians could be fired, mainly those who work in plans, cyber and joint force development, according to the Pentagon’s informative session. The military personnel working in J-7 would be reallocated.
Approximately half of the staff of five other directives: labor and personnel (J1), Logistics (J4), strategy, plans and policies (J5), Ciber (J6) and strength structure, resources and evaluations (J8)) would pass from the Pentagon to Suffolk.
The plan recognizes some potential costs to transfer people to a new location, but evaluates the long -term general savings of approximately $ 470 million in the next five years.
The US space command could also see its missile defense component command eliminated in restructuring.
The information session of the Defense Department argues that the Antimisile Defense Mission is already fulfilled by the services and other combatant commands, and as a result it can be eliminated without affecting operations. But closures will probably imply a loss of experience, warns the information.
Separated from the $ 270 million in cost reduction, the United States is also likely to stop a planned expansion of Japan US forces, which would save around $ 1.18 billion.
The informative session reviewed by NBC News recognizes that there is a political risk with Japan by reversing that expansion and that could result in a small order and a west control of the international line.
