Back to Iceland

[tomahawk6]

The US is not looking for a full time base but one that is limited as the Navy prepares facilities there for use by rotational assets.This is intended to respond to  Russian naval activity in the Atlantic.

https://www.armytimes.com/news/2018/01/10/restoration-of-us-air-base-in-iceland-does-not-mean-troops-will-follow-navy-says/

 

[JP4422]

Seems like a waste of money if it isn't going to be used regularly. Might as well send a small contingent there to do something.

 

[tomahawk6]

I think it has more to do with politics.

 

[JP4422]

I think it has more to do with politics.

That's probably true. I could see the US of using this as a "we have the capability to" without actually doing it.

 

[tomahawk6]

I also think that some NATO partners could also use the new facility which would  ease the concerns in Iceland and provide a fig leaf for the US presence.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I think it has more to do with politics.

That's probably true. I could see the US of using this as a "we have the capability to" without actually doing it.

The "politics" is probably more Icelandic than American.  While there was a large permanent US military presence there for many years and Iceland is a member of NATO, both were not without significant public opposition.  The difference now is that the current (since Nov 2017) Icelandic PM is from their Left-Green Movement which has always had Iceland’s withdrawal from NATO as part of its manifesto.  The nature of Icelandic politics for some time has resulted in a number of coalition governments and the present one is no different - the Left-Greens hold the second largest number of seats in their parliament.  There may not be an immediate path to withdrawal from NATO or refusing to allow the US to re-establish their previous presence but don't expect open arms or warm greetings from the Icelandic government.