Skip to main content
Politics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

11
  • 10
    Your question isn't clear - why do you expect EU or Germany to pay more than South Korea that faces an imminent nuclear threat and possible invasion from North Korea? Europe (or Germany) has been relatively conflict-free till the Russia - Ukraine war. After the Russian invasion, all EU members of NATO have committed to increase the defense spending which is what you would rationally expect a country to do - revise budget according threat perception. (Note also that your title is quite different from the final question you emphasise).
    – sfxedit
    Commented Feb 21 at 14:43
  • 4
    I think it is a two-way street: the US does provide a protections, but it also gets in exchange loyalty, adhering to the US line in international policy, buying the US arms, etc. If the US asked Germany for more money, perhaps the latter would prefer to maintain bigger own armed forces, or would demand reduction of the US presence, etc. It is interesting to discuss various factors incorporated in this balance - by comparison with Korea seems far-fetched.
    – Morisco
    Commented Feb 21 at 14:50
  • 6
    Of course it's a two-way street. The USA wants its forces in Germany because there is a benefit to the USA beyond protection money and arms sales. Some presence of Country A's military in allied Country B is a benefit to both countries. A benefit to Country A is that its foreign-stationed military doesn't have to travel nearly so far to where Country A wants them to be. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_projection. The distance between Dover AFB and Baghdad is nearly three times the distance between Ramstein and Baghdad. Iraq war: 100s of flights/month, 10s of millions of pounds of cargo.
    – Lag
    Commented Feb 21 at 15:31
  • 21
    A general comment: The question implicitly assumes (like many questions at Politics.SE) that things happen differently in separate cases for rational analyzed reasons that are fair and make sense compared to each other. This is almost never the case. This isn't how international relations is done. Nobody when negotiating with Germany asks if this is fair to South Korea. Each situation evolves in a path dependent way of its own to produce a status quo.
    – ohwilleke ♦
    Commented Feb 22 at 0:49
  • 10
    The bases in Germany are for the benefit of US power projection, not to defend Germany. The bases in Soeul are to defend South Korea (primarily). Why would Germany pay for something that benefits the US?
    – ScottishTapWater
    Commented Feb 22 at 14:45