By Richard Halloran

As a tsunami of anti-Americanism circles the globe from Seoul to Jakarta and on to Paris and Berlin, a focal point of protest is the visible presence of U.S. military forces.

An American backlash has begun. The Bush administration is reviewing deployment of U.S. forces abroad, and more than one newspaper columnist, evidently reflecting the neo-isolationist streak in America, has declared that the United States should not be where it is not wanted.

Secretary of the Army Thomas White said in Hawai'i recently that the Pentagon was seeking to determine what would be "the most appropriate posture" that would "better fit the situation as it currently exists."

Earlier, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, "Eleven years after the end of the Cold War, there is a school of thought to rethink the numbers and types of forces we have in different locations. We are seeking a posture that is U.S. presence suitable to each region."

Influential New York Times columnist William Safire recently wrote, "Because the U.S. is not an imperialist power, it does not belong where a democratic nation decides America is unwanted."

The USS Kitty Hawk enters Yokosuka Naval Base in Japan. Most in Japan appear satisfied with the U.S. presence in Yokosuka, but other military units in Asia could be moved or dissolved, including the 2nd Infantry Division and Eighth Army headquarters, both in South Korea. Advertiser library photo • Aug. 11, 1998

Here are suggestions for future U.S. deployments from South Korea to Saudi Arabia once the disputes with Iraq and North Korea have been settled by diplomacy or military force. The United States cannot back away from those confrontations without losing the confidence of allies or credibility with adversaries.

It should begin by getting reaffirmations of treaties with South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Thailand and Australia. South Korea, site of vociferous anti-Americanism, should be asked whether it wants to keep its security treaty or abrogate it.

South Korea's new president, Roh Moo-hyun, has called for a "rebalance" in relations with the United States. Whatever South Korea decides, the U.S. Army's 2nd Infantry Division there should be moved to the United States, where it would be available, as it is not now, for duty anywhere.

The U.S. Eighth Army headquarters in Seoul should be dissolved and absorbed into the U.S. Pacific Command in Hawai'i. A small contingent could be left behind as a symbolic United Nations Command.

Osan Air Base should be closed, and war planes transferred to Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, where anti-American demonstrations are directed mostly against U.S. Marine ground forces. Those troops could be moved to Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands in the Central Pacific or to the northern coast of Australia, where they would be within easy reach of Southeast Asia.

The U.S. aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk, whose homeport is Yokosuka, south of Tokyo, could stay there, as only Japanese leftists appear to be unhappy with the alliance with America.

Australia has been a close ally since World War II and became reliant on the United States after Britain's decision in 1968 to withdraw most of its military forces from east of Suez.

Australians, official and otherwise, are quick to point out that dependence on the United States does not make Canberra follow Washington blindly. There is also a fair amount of anti-Americanism in their nation. Nonetheless, the Australians and the United States have begun exploratory discussions about basing the Marines there.

Thailand, which has no U.S. military bases, maintains what appears to be balanced security relations with the United States. The Cobra Gold joint ground maneuvers conducted there for a month each year arouse little anti-Americanism.

Singapore is host to a small naval support base that draws little objection. Thailand and Singapore may be models for other U.S. deployments in Asia.

In contrast, the Philippines threw out U.S. bases more than a decade ago and has been reluctant to have U.S. forces return even to fight terrorists.

In the Persian Gulf, the United States should withdraw after dealing with Saddam Hussein in Iraq. The United States gets only 4.6 percent of its oil from Iraq and could import more from Latin America or Africa. Europeans should devise ways to protect their oil suppliers around the Persian Gulf.

The same should apply to Saudi Arabia, which is a more difficult issue because it is the second-largest supplier of oil to the United States, after Canada.

Even so, Saudi Arabia has a dictatorial, corrupt government and the United States should withdraw from that nation because it is the source of an explosive anti-Americanism.

Richard Halloran formerly was a New York Times correspondent in Asia and Washington. Reach him at oranhall@hawaii.rr.com.