troops

United States President Donald Trump has announced plans to deploy an additional 5,000 troops to Poland.

Trump announced the surprise deployment on social media late on Thursday, citing his friendship with right-wing Polish President Karol Nawrocki.

The move came days after a planned deployment to Poland was apparently scrapped and will deepen uncertainty surrounding the Trump administration’s approach to NATO allies and its long-term commitment to maintaining a military presence in Europe. It leaves European partners increasingly unclear about which areas they should prioritise as they formulate defence strategies.

“Based on the successful Election of the now President ⁠of Poland, Karol Nawrocki, who I was proud to Endorse, and our relationship with him, I am pleased to announce that the United States will be sending an additional 5,000 Troops to Poland,” Trump wrote.

Nawrocki welcomed the announcement on social media.

“Good alliances are those based on cooperation, mutual respect, and a commitment to our shared ‌security,” he wrote on Thursday evening.

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski also welcomed the news on Friday, saying it ensures that “the presence of American troops in Poland will be maintained more or less at previous levels”.

About-face

The announced deployment is a sudden about-face from US declarations of plans to reduce military support to Europe under Trump’s “America First” doctrine.

The US president has for years been lambasting European NATO partners for failing to spend enough on defence. His opprobrium has risen in recent weeks as European states have criticised the US-Israeli war on Iran and refused to join the conflict.

The Pentagon abruptly announced a week ago that it was scrapping the planned deployment of 4,000 troops to Poland.

Earlier this month, Trump announced he was withdrawing 5,000 troops from Germany following a spat with Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who said Washington had been “humiliated” by Iranian negotiators.

The US president later said that he would be “cutting a lot further than 5,000”.

Polish officials have noted that Warsaw pays significant sums towards the cost of US troop deployments. The suggestion of a pullback has caused concern over security in Poland and elsewhere in Europe, as Russia’s war on neighbouring Ukraine continues, with the Trump administration largely ceasing efforts to mediate a ceasefire.

European states report that they are getting to grips with the need to replace US defence capabilities, albeit slowly. However, sources suggest that the erratic policies emerging from the White House are creating confusion over which elements should be prioritised.

“It is confusing indeed, and not always easy to navigate,” Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard told reporters ahead of hosting a meeting of NATO foreign ministers on Friday, which will be attended by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

US defence officials are also confused, according to the AP news agency.

“We just spent the better part of two weeks reacting to the first announcement. We don’t know what this means either,” said one official.

‘America First’

The US president has lashed out at fellow NATO members in recent months for failing to support the US-Israeli war on Iran, suggesting Washington could withdraw from the military alliance as a result.

State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said Rubio would discuss the need for NATO allies to increase defence spending and shoulder greater responsibility at Friday’s meeting of NATO foreign ministers.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, who has worked hard in recent months to attempt to soothe the US president’s displeasure with his alliance peers, welcomed Trump’s deployment to Poland and cautioned that Europe must become less reliant on the US.

Rubio said before meeting his NATO counterparts in Sweden: “Like any alliance, it ⁠has to be good ⁠for everyone who’s involved. There has to be a clear ⁠understanding of what the expectations are.” ⁠

He also suggested, however, that the meeting is likely to prove less than comfortable.

“The president’s views, frankly disappointment, at some of our NATO allies and their response to our operations in the Middle East – they’re well documented – that will have to be addressed,” he insisted, before adding “that won’t be solved or addressed today”.

While Rubio meets with NATO counterparts, senior Pentagon officials will brief partners at the alliance’s headquarters in Brussels about Washington’s commitment to European defence.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon announced it plans to reduce the number of combat brigades based in Europe from four to three.

Many of Washington’s allies in Europe remain frustrated with Trump’s handling of the war with Iran, which has damaged their economies and prompted some European leaders to question the reliability of the US.

European NATO countries also remain concerned about Trump’s threats to annex Greenland, which is an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, a NATO ally.

It remains unclear whether the deployment to Poland announced on Thursday includes the same soldiers as those the Pentagon said would no longer be deployed to the Central European country, or if they will include redeployments from Germany.

YEREVAN, Armenia — European leaders on Monday said President Trump’s surprise decision to pull thousands of U.S. troops out of Germany is just the latest signal that Europe must take more responsibility for its security.

The Pentagon announced last week it would pull some 5,000 troops out of Germany, but Trump told reporters on Saturday the U.S. plans on “cutting a lot further.”

Trump offered no reason for the move, which blindsided NATO. But his decision came amid an escalating dispute with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who said the U.S. has been humiliated by Iran in talks to end the war it launched with Israel on Feb. 28. Trump has also expressed anger over European allies’ reluctance to get involved in the conflict.

European leaders meeting at a summit in Yerevan, Armenia, sought to both downplay the impact of 5,000 fewer troops in Germany while acknowledging that it provides a useful nudge for the continent to step up its role within NATO.

“I do not see those figures as dramatic, but I think they should be handled in a harmonious way inside the framework of NATO,” said Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said “there needs to be a stronger European element in NATO, I have no doubt about that.”

Tensions within NATO have mounted since the second Trump administration came into office last year warning that European allies would have to defend themselves and Ukraine in the future. Talks on ending the war there, now in its fourth year, have bogged down as the U.S. focuses on Iran.

Taken by surprise

The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, said the timing of Trump’s announcement came as a surprise, even though there has been “talk about withdrawal of U.S. troops for a long time from Europe.”

Asked whether she believes Trump is trying to punish Merz, Kallas said: “I don’t see into the head of President Trump, so he has to explain it himself.”

Merz did not attend the European Political Community summit in Yerevan, which included about 30 European leaders, plus Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney.

At a military exercise in northern Germany, the country’s defense minister, Boris Pistorius, said Berlin has not yet received “official confirmation of when and how this is supposed to happen, on what scale.” The reduction of U.S. troops “would not put into question NATO’s deterrence capability,” he added.

European countries and Canada have increased defense spending and military recruitment efforts over the last year in response to Trump’s threats.

NATO seeks clarity

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte also played down the significance of fewer U.S. troops in Germany, while acknowledging U.S. “disappointment” about the level of European support for the Iran war.

France and the U.K. have given U.S. forces limited use of bases on their territories to attack Iran. Spain has outright denied U.S. forces the use of its airspace and bases.

Rutte, who has championed Trump’s leadership at NATO despite the U.S. president’s criticism of a majority of the allies, said: “I would say the Europeans have heard a message.”

European allies and Canada have known since early last year that Trump would pull some troops out of Europe — and some were pulled out of Romania in October — but U.S. officials had pledged to coordinate any moves with NATO allies to avoid creating a security vacuum.

NATO spokesperson Allison Hart said over the weekend that officials at the 32-nation military alliance “are working with the U.S. to understand the details of their decision on force posture in Germany.”

Iran and trade trouble

With the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran looking shakier, Rutte said European nations “have decided to pre-position assets, key assets, close to the theater for the next phase.” He provided no further details.

European leaders have insisted their countries would not help police the Strait of Hormuz, a key energy trade route, until the war is over.

“If the United States is ready to reopen Hormuz, that’s great. That’s what we’ve been asking for since the beginning,” said French President Emmanuel Macron. But he underlined that Europeans are not ready to get involved in any operation “that does not seem clear.”

Carlson and Cook write for the Associated Press. Cook reported from Brussels. AP writer Geir Moulson in Berlin contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s vow to shrink America’s military deployment in Germany has put a new spotlight on the U.S. role in Europe.

There are usually 80,000 to 100,000 troops on the continent, with more than 36,000 in Germany. The Pentagon announced Friday that it would remove 5,000 troops from Germany, and Trump said the next day that he would go “a lot further” than that.

The U.S. military presence is a legacy of World War II, when Americans helped stabilize and rebuild Europe, and the Cold War, when the troops served as a bulwark against Soviet expansion. More recently, the deployment has played a key role supporting operations in the Arctic, Africa and the Middle East including the current conflict with Iran.

But Trump has broken with years of bipartisan consensus, criticizing European allies in NATO and following through on threats to reduce the U.S. commitment to the continent’s security. The recent announcement comes after escalating tensions with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who last week said the U.S. was being “humiliated” by Iran and accused Washington of lacking a clear strategy.

Here’s a look at America’s current deployment in Europe and how it could change.

What to know about the U.S. defense posture in Europe

The U.S. European Command, created in 1947 and known as EUCOM, is one of 11 combat commands within the Defense Department, and covers some 50 countries and territories.

In addition to more than 36,000 troops in Germany, Italy hosts more than 12,000 and there’s another 10,000 in the United Kingdom, according to Pentagon numbers from December.

The Pentagon has offered few details about which troops or operations would be affected in the drawdown announced Friday.

The U.S. increased its European deployment after Russia launched its full-scale war on Ukraine four years ago. NATO allies like Germany have expected for over a year that these troops would be the first to leave.

European deployment has global role

Aside from its role as a deterrent to Russia, the U.S. military presence in Europe helps Washington project power across the globe.

U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, who is the commander in Europe of both U.S. and NATO forces, reinforced the benefits of a strong footprint on the continent to the Senate Armed Services Committee in March.

“It is having capabilities in Europe, munitions in Europe that allow us to help U.S. Africa Command to target terrorists in Africa, or to help U.S. Central Command as they execute Operation Epic Fury,” he told lawmakers, referring to the Iran war. “The distances are shorter, it’s less expensive and it’s much easier to project power.”

Germany hosts the headquarters of the U.S. European and Africa commands, Ramstein Air Base and a medical center in Landstuhl, where casualties from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were treated. U.S. nuclear weapons are also stationed in the country.

The U.S. has approximately 100 nuclear bombs deployed to bases in Europe that would be delivered by aircraft, according to a March estimate from the Federation of American Scientists. The group’s report said the bombs are at bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, while it’s possible they’re also at a base in the United Kingdom.

A call to move U.S. forces further east in Europe

Even before Trump’s comment Saturday to reporters, Republican leaders of both armed services committees in Congress expressed concern about the Pentagon plan, warning a premature drawdown in Europe would send “the wrong signal to Vladimir Putin” as the Russian president continues his war in Ukraine.

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi and Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama said troops should be shifted to bases in Eastern Europe rather than withdrawn.

The lawmakers also said allies have made “substantial investments to host U.S. troops.”

Wicker and Rogers said the Pentagon, following its announcement Friday, has also decided to cancel the planned deployment to Germany of one of the U.S. Army’s long-range fires battalions, which operate ground-launched missile systems.

Trump’s vision: DIY defense in Europe

As part of its National Defense Strategy announced in January — a sweeping document laying out a vision on everything from deterring China to defending against cyberattacks to disrupting Iran’s nuclear ambitions — the administration said Europe must do more for its own defense.

While “we are and will remain engaged in Europe, we must — and will — prioritize defending the U.S. Homeland and deterring China,” it said.

Among other things, the document noted that Europe’s economic power, while shrinking in relative terms globally, remains significant, and said that Germany’s economy alone “dwarfs that of Russia.”

“Fortunately, our NATO allies are substantially more powerful than Russia — it is not even close,” it said, noting a recent commitment among NATO allies to raise national defense spending to 5% of GDP in total, a push led by Trump.

What Germany has been doing to beef up its forces

Germany has moved to modernize its long-neglected military, or Bundeswehr, since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. That year, it set up a $117 billion special fund to boost Bundeswehr, much of which has been committed to procuring new equipment.

Late last year, Merz’s government announced plans to raise the number of military personnel to 260,000, up from about 180,000. In 2001, when Germany still had conscription, the headcount was 300,000 — more than a third of them conscripts.

Berlin says it will also need around 200,000 reservists, more than double the current figure.

Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, in comments to German news agency dpa after the Pentagon’s drawdown plan was announced Friday, acknowledged that Europe must take more responsibility for its own security — and said the Bundeswehr is growing, military equipment is being procured more quickly, and infrastructure is being developed.

Keaten and Finley write for the Associated Press. Keaten reported from Geneva.

May 2 (UPI) — The Pentagon announced Friday that the United States would draw down 5,000 troops from Germany, and Germany responded Saturday that the move was anticipated.

The decision came after Chancellor Friederick Merz made comments criticizing the war with Iran, saying the United States has been “humiliated” by the war.

“The Secretary of War has ordered the withdrawal of approximately 5,000 troops from Germany,” Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement. “This decision follows a thorough review of the Department’s force posture in Europe and is in recognition of theater requirements and conditions on the ground. We expect the withdrawal to be completed over the next six to 12 months.”

President Donald Trump lashed out at Germany on Truth Social Thursday after Merz made the comments.

“The Chancellor of Germany should spend more time on ending the war with Russia/Ukraine (Where he has been totally ineffective!), and fixing his broken Country, especially Immigration and Energy, and less time on interfering with those that are getting rid of the Iran Nuclear threat, thereby making the World, including Germany, a safer place!” the president said.

At a visit to a school in Germany on Monday, Merz said U.S. officials had entered a war without a clear strategy, saying the “whole affair is ill-considered to say the least.”

“The Iranians are obviously very skilled at negotiating, or rather, very skillful at not negotiating, letting the Americans travel to Islamabad and then leave again without any result,” CNN reported Merz said. “An entire nation is being humiliated by the Iranian leadership, especially by these so-called Revolutionary Guards. And so I hope that this ends as quickly as possible.”

On Tuesday, Trump said that Merz “doesn’t know what he’s talking about.”

In response to the announcement of the drawdown, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius downplayed the news and called it “foreseeable.”

He said it illustrated the need for Germany to take more responsibility for its own security and said the country is “on the right track.”

As of December 2025, there were 36,436 active-duty U.S. military personnel permanently stationed in Germany, according to the U.S. Defense Manpower Data Center.

After the removal of 5,000 troops, Germany will still host more than 30,000 U.S. personnel.

Trump also threatened to remove troops in 2020 when Angela Merkel was the chancellor.

On Friday, Trump told reporters in the White House that Italy had “not been of any help to us,” and accused Spain of being “absolutely horrible.” He said he may remove troops from those countries, too. Italy and Spain have denied any U.S. military planes that are used in the war against Iran from using their bases.

Germany has allowed limited use of its military infrastructure, though it hasn’t allowed its use as staging grounds for strikes.

Merz has said Germany will help if the war moves to a post-war stage, such as a stabilization mission, CNN reported. Berlin recently announced it was sending a naval minesweeper to the Strait of Hormuz once a lasting cease-fire deal is in place.

Lawmakers of both parties have opposed the decision to remove personnel from Europe.

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and Rep. Mike D. Rogers, R-Ala., chairs of the Senate and House Armed Services committees, issued a joint statement Saturday against the decision and telling the Department of Defense to work with the oversight committees. They said they were “very concerned” about the move.

“Rather than withdrawing forces from the continent altogether, it is in America’s interest to maintain a strong deterrent in Europe by moving these 5,000 U.S. forces to the east,” the statement said. “Allies there have made substantial investments to host U.S. troops, reducing costs for the U.S. taxpayer while strengthening NATO’s front line to help deter a far more costly conflict from ever beginning.

“Any significant change to the U.S. force posture in Europe warrants a deliberate review process and close coordination with Congress and our allies. We expect the Department to engage with its oversight committees in the days and weeks ahead on this decision.”

House Armed Services Committee member Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., said that pulling the troops isn’t “grounded in any coherent U.S. national security policy, strategy, or even analysis.”

“It is counter to what is needed and will embolden Russia,” Smith said in a statement Friday. “It doesn’t matter that our presence in Germany is essential to our national security. … It doesn’t matter that withdrawing a brigade combat team from Europe runs counter to the intent of the law that Congress passed overwhelmingly last year. All that matters are the hurt feelings of a president who is seeking political vengeance.”

Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, asked Trump to reverse the decision.

“Weakening our military footprint in Europe at a time when Russian forces continue to mercilessly attack Ukraine and harass our NATO allies is a priceless gift to [Russian President] Vladimir Putin and suggests American commitments to our allies are dependent on the president’s mood,” Reed said in a statement Friday.

President Donald Trump has feuded with European allies over their reluctance to step up support for war on Iran.

The United States military has said that it will pull 5,000 troops out of Germany amid ongoing tensions with the key European ally concerning the US war against Iran, according to media reports.

Reuters reported that the Pentagon made the decision on Friday, several days after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that Iran was humiliating the US during negotiations over the end of the war.

“The president is rightly reacting to these counterproductive remarks,” the report cites an anonymous official as saying.

The news service reported that the withdrawal is expected to take place over the next six to 12 months. The decision was also reported by CBS News, citing senior defence officials.

President Donald Trump has lashed out at European allies for not doing more to assist the US-Israel war on Iran, and had stated on Wednesday that he was thinking of pulling troops out of European countries deemed insufficiently supportive.

The US outlet Politico reported earlier this week that Trump’s threats to pull troops out of European countries caught the military by surprise, citing several anonymous defence officials and a congressional aide.

Trump attacked his German counterpart in another social media post on Thursday, stating that Merz should spend more time trying to end the war between Russia and Ukraine and less time “interfering with those that are getting rid of the Iran Nuclear threat, thereby making the World, including Germany, a safer place”.

While European countries have been hesitant to commit their own forces to the US war on Iran, leaders such as Merz were initially hesitant to offer criticism of the US attacks, widely considered illegal under international law.

But criticism has mounted as the war sends shocks across the global economy due to serious disruptions to regional energy supply. Earlier this week, Merz compared the war to previous military quagmires such as the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

“It is, at the moment, a pretty tangled situation,” he said. “And it is costing us a great deal of money. This conflict, this war against Iran, has a direct impact on our economic output.”

North Korea has opened a memorial museum in Pyongyang for its soldiers killed while fighting alongside Russian forces in the war in Ukraine, in the clearest sign yet of how central the conflict has become to the growing alliance.

The inaugural ceremony at the Memorial Museum of Combat Feats at the Overseas Military Operations was held on Sunday. It also marked the first anniversary of what the two countries describe as the end of an operation to “liberate” Russia’s Kursk border region from a Ukrainian incursion, the state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on Monday.

KCNA said North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un attended the event along with senior Russian officials, including State Duma Chairman Vyacheslav Volodin and Defence Minister Andrei Belousov.

South Korea’s intelligence agency has estimated that North Korea deployed about 15,000 soldiers to fight for Russia in the Kursk region, and that about 2,000 of them were killed. Moscow and Pyongyang have not disclosed any figures.

During the ceremony, Kim sprinkled earth over the remains of one soldier and laid flowers for others whose bodies had been placed in a mortuary, according to KCNA. Kim and the Russian officials then signed a guestbook at the newly opened museum.

In his speech, Kim said the fallen North Korean troops would remain “a symbol of the Korean people’s heroism” and would support “a victorious march by the Korean and Russian people”.

He accused the United States and its allies of pursuing a “hegemonic plot and military adventurism” on the Russia-Ukraine front, praising Russian and North Korean forces for thwarting those efforts.

Meeting Belousov separately, Kim pledged full support for Russia’s policy of defending its sovereignty and security interests, KCNA said.

Russia’s TASS news agency quoted Belousov as saying that Moscow is ready to sign a military cooperation plan with Pyongyang covering 2027-31.

In a letter read by Volodin, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the new museum would be “a clear symbol of the friendship and solidarity” between the two countries and pledged to further strengthen their “comprehensive strategic partnership”.

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Kim has tilted his foreign policy decisively towards Moscow, supplying troops and conventional weapons in exchange, analysts say, for economic support and possibly sensitive technologies.

Officials in South Korea, the US and allied countries fear Russia could transfer advanced know-how to Pyongyang that would boost its nuclear and missile programmes.

Military experts say North Korean troops initially suffered heavy losses in Kursk due to their lack of combat experience and unfamiliarity with the terrain, making them vulnerable to Ukrainian drone and artillery fire.

But Ukrainian military and intelligence officials have assessed that the North Koreans later gained crucial battlefield experience and became central to Russia’s efforts to overwhelm Ukrainian forces by deploying large numbers of soldiers in the region.

SEOUL, April 27 (UPI) — North Korea held an inauguration ceremony for a memorial museum honoring troops dispatched to fight for Russia in Ukraine, state media reported Monday, with leader Kim Jong Un pledging continued support for Moscow in its “sacred war.”

The ceremony took place Sunday at the Memorial Museum of Combat Feats at the Overseas Military Operations in Pyongyang, the state-run Korean Central News Agency said.

The event marked the first anniversary of what Pyongyang called the “liberation of Kursk,” referring to Russia’s battlefield gains in the war. North Korea declared Russia’s recapture of the region on April 26 last year.

North Korea has deepened military ties with Russia since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Pyongyang has shipped thousands of containers of munitions and deployed about 15,000 troops to assist Russian forces in the Kursk region, South Korea’s National Intelligence Service has said, estimating that roughly 2,000 of those troops had been killed.

In a speech at the ceremony, Kim highlighted the “strategic significance” of the operations in Kursk and described the North Korean soldiers’ actions as “without parallel in history.”

“No matter how the rules of war change or when and where a crisis arises, we must always be strengthened as a sincere, dedicated and powerful bulwark that deals with it with united strength,” KCNA quoted Kim as saying.

Several Russian officials attended the inauguration, including State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin and Defense Minister Andrei Belousov.

Volodin read a letter from Russian President Vladimir Putin expressing gratitude for North Korean troops and praising the “militant friendship” between the two countries.

“The Korean soldiers, fighting shoulder to shoulder with the Russian comrades-in-arms, displayed their extraordinary bravery and genuine devotion and glorified themselves with immortal honor,” the letter said.

After the speeches, officials cut a ribbon to formally open the complex, while white balloons were released into the sky in tribute to the fallen.

In a burial rite for repatriated remains, Kim covered a coffin with dirt as guards of honor fired a rifle salute and participants observed a moment of silence, KCNA said.

Kim also held separate meetings with Belousov and Volodin ahead of the inauguration, KCNA reported.

In talks with Kim, Belousov said the two sides had agreed to expand military cooperation on a “sustainable long-term basis,” with plans to sign a cooperation roadmap covering 2027 to 2031, according to a statement posted on the Russian Defense Ministry’s Telegram channel.

Kim reaffirmed that North Korea would “fully support” Russia’s war in Ukraine, KCNA said, describing it as a “sacred war” to defend sovereignty.

In exchange for its military assistance, Pyongyang is believed to be receiving much-needed financial support and advanced military technology. A March report by South Korea’s Institute for National Security Strategy estimated that North Korea may have earned up to $14.4 billion from its involvement in the war through arms sales, labor exports and related assistance.

WASHINGTON  — The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that U.S. troops may sue military contractors for their injuries, siding with a soldier who was badly injured when a Taliban operative working at the Bagram Airfield detonated a suicide bomb.

Five soldiers were killed and 17 were wounded, including 20-year-old Winston Henceley, who suffered a fractured skull and brain injuries and is permanently disabled.

In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that neither federal law nor the Constitution shields military contractors if their mistakes or negligence result in solders being injured in a combat zone.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the court’s opinion for an unusual majority that included Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil M. Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

In the past, Thomas has objected to court precedents that prevented troops from suing the U.S. government for their injuries, including from medical practice.

And he said that rule should not be expanded to shield military contractors.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented, along with Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.

“Because the Constitution gives the federal government exclusive authority over foreign affairs and the conduct of wars, federal law preempts all state law that substantially interferes with the Government’s exercise of those powers,” Alito wrote.

Hencely had tried to stop and question Ahmad Nayeb, an Afghan employee, as he walked toward soldiers who had gathered for a Veteran’s Day 5K race in 2016.

The Army concluded that Hencely’s intervention “likely prevented a far greater tragedy,” and its investigation concluded that the Fluor Corporation that had a contract to run operations at the base was primarily responsible for the attack.

The report said Fluor was negligent in hiring an Afghan who had been a Taliban operative, and it failed to closely supervise him.

But Henceley sued Fluor for his injuries; a federal judge in South Carolina and the 4th Circuit threw out his suit.

“During wartime, where a private service contractor is integrated into combatant activities over which the military retains command authority, a tort claim arising out of the contractor’s engagement in such activities shall be preempted,” the 4th Circuit said.

The court agreed to hear his appeal and overturn the 4th Circuit, clearing his suit to proceed.

The Army’s top official pointed to low-cost interceptor drones first sent to Ukraine as one defense against Iranian barrages of Shahed-136 one-way attack munitions. During Congressional testimony on Thursday, Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll lauded the Merops interceptor and the process to get it quickly into the hands of troops in the Middle East.

The Merops is a small, relatively inexpensive drone built specifically to zip through the skies and intercept long-range one-way attack drones. As we have previously reported, Ukraine has been using several locally produced drones, as well as Merops, to counter Russian Shaheds successfully for some time now, proving-out the concept.

“When the conflict kicked off, within about eight days, we were able to purchase…13,000 Merops, which are incredible,” Driscoll exclaimed. “They’re about $15,000 a piece right now. We think as they scale, they’ll get less than [$10,000] and we’re able to take Shaheds down that cost $30,000 to $50,000, which is amazing because that puts us on the right end of the cost curve, and we will make that trade all day long.”

The U.S. has its own interceptors that have been in service for years, such as Raytheon’s Coyote, but they cost roughly 10 times more.

A new system to identify and take down Russian drones is deployed to NATO’s eastern flank

In a recent interview with Bloomberg, Driscoll said that larger orders could drive that to $3,000 to $5,000 per interceptor. Given the success in Ukraine, it is likely that the Pentagon and other customers would see far less risk when it comes to ordering large numbers.

As we noted in a story last month, the Pentagon sent thousands of these drone interceptors to the Middle East. Iranian strikes on U.S. military facilities killed U.S. troops and caused damage to bases and equipment. Driscoll did not offer more specifics about how often they were used, how many Shaheds they downed or exactly where they were deployed.

Merops was “developed as part of the US-backed Project Eagle initiative, which includes contributions from Swift Beat, a company associated with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt,” according to the Ukraine Defense Tech Community (DTC), a marketplace for modern weaponry. “The system is built around Surveyor drones, which act as airborne interceptors capable of destroying enemy UAVs mid-flight.”

Each Merops unit “includes a command station, launch platforms, and a fleet of Surveyor drones,” DTC explained. “These interceptors can operate autonomously or be remotely piloted and are equipped with onboard sensors for target tracking.”

While full technical specifications remain undisclosed, they can reportedly reach speeds of over 280 km/h (175 mph). “The platform is considered fast enough to intercept jet-powered drones such as the Russian Geran-3, which can exceed 300 km/h,” DTC pointed out.

The interceptor can carry an explosive warhead and destroys targets either through a direct collision or a proximity detonation.

Driscoll said the ability to field Merops so quickly is because the Army streamlined its acquisition process.

“Fundamentally, one of the core problems was our own bureaucracy, our own infrastructure, our own decision-making organizations had decayed from any sort of speed and rationality,” he testified. “The reason we’ve been able to move fast since the conflict in Iran started is because of work 10, 12, 14 months ago to reorganize our acquisitions department.”

“And practically,” he added, “what that did is it took us from a 16-step decision-making process – where each of the bodies along those 16 steps could veto it and start it back over, and it could take two to seven years to purchase something.”

“We put everybody into a group who could make decisions on the fly,” the secretary noted. “And so a lot of the things the Army has worked on in the previous year are paying dividends as we try to make decisions quickly.”

You can watch Driscoll’s testimony on Merops at the 36-minute mark of the video below.

Budget Hearing – The United States Army

In Ukraine, Merops has proven to be a far cheaper alternative to munitions like Patriot interceptors and even far less advanced missiles for downing Shahed drones which have caused widespread destruction across that country. While these drones have neither the payload nor range of the far more expensive Patriot munitions, they can be deployed in great numbers giving them the ability to cover larger geographical areas. That helps keep the magazine depth of more sophisticated effectors from being quickly depleted and turns the disastrous ‘exchange ratio’ between cost of target versus effector on its head. In many cases, these systems would still need to be part of a layered defense, especially when used as point defense at high value installations and infrastructure.

Now that these weapons have helped save American lives and equipment, Merops success means we will likely be seeing more low-cost drone interceptors like it in the future.

Contact the author: howard@thewarzone.com