Menu Search Account

LegiStorm

Get LegiStorm App Visit Product Demo Website
» Get LegiStorm App
» Get LegiStorm Pro Free Demo

Defense Budget: Alternative Measures of Costs of Military Commitments Abroad (CRS Report for Congress)

Premium   Purchase PDF for $24.95 (8 pages)
add to cart or subscribe for unlimited access
Release Date June 16, 1995
Report Number 95-726
Report Type Report
Authors Stephen Daggett, Foreign Affairs and National Defense Division
Source Agency Congressional Research Service
Summary:

As of Sept. 30, 1994, about 286,594 U.S. active duty military personnel were stationed overseas, including about 128,000 in European NATO countries, over 45,000 in Japan, and almost 37,000 in Korea. (1) Under current plans, the number of U.S. troops stationed ashore in Europe will decline to 100,000 by the end of FY1996, but other overseas deployments will remain stable. The Department of Defense projects that it will spend $16 billion in FY1996 to pay and operate forces permanently stationed ashore in foreign countries. (2) This $16 billion figure, however, reflects only one way of measuring the costs borne by the United States for military activities abroad. Other definitions of costs are applied frequently. In the 103rd Congress, where Members of Congress addressed defense burdensharing issues on the floor of the House or Senate more than forty times, figures cited for the costs of "defending our allies" ranged from $1 billion a year to $180 billion. (3) The main source of this wide divergence is the very different definitions of overseas costs being used. Commonly cited measures of overseas costs range from very narrow to very broad, including (1) incremental costs of deploying forces abroad rather than in the continental United States; (2) direct pay and operating costs of U.S. forces deployed overseas; (3) total costs, including prorated shares of weapons acquisition, overhead, and indirect support, of U.S. forces deployed abroad; and (4) total costs of U.S. forces assigned to fulfill regional commitments. This report explains these measures and analyzes some of the strengths and weaknesses of each. 1.  Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, Worldwide Manpower Distribution by Geographical Area , September 30, 1994. 2.  Department of Defense, Defense Overseas Funding, FY1996/FY1997 , February 1995. 3.  See: Congressional Record , September 9, 1993, p. H6550 and Congressional Record , May 18, 1994, p. H3539.