With uncertainty across the Atlantic, Europe worries about its own security

LONDON — When donald trump suggested during the 2016 presidential campaign that could not fulfill a US commitment defending other NATO countries if they were attacked, triggered the alarm throughout the transatlantic alliance.

As Trump’s “America First” rhetoric draws applause from his fervent supporters, the future of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is back on the agenda. But this time, European leaders recognize the alliance must evolve to meet the challenges of the 21st century and say that they are willing to take greater responsibility for their own defense.

Many things have changed in eight years.

First, the Trump presidency. forced Europe to recognize that American military support was no longer guaranteed, then the Russian invasion of Ukraine underscored the threat on its eastern border. Meanwhile, the United States has increasingly focused on China’s expansion in the Asia-Pacific, as well as Iran and North Korea.

“Faced with powers such as Russia and China, and a United States whose turn towards Asia seems inevitable, regardless of who wins the next elections, we Europeans must do more to guarantee our own security,” Josep Borrell, head of foreign policy of the Union European boss, wrote last weekend in The Times of London.

After relying on American leadership of NATO to protect them with overwhelming nuclear and conventional capabilities for the past 75 years, European nations must take a larger role in funding and leading the 32-nation alliance because their interests diverge every more and more of those of the United States. State.

“We are talking about a NATO of which the United States is still part, but of which it is no longer the indispensable leader,” said Malcolm Chalmers, deputy director general of the Royal United Services Institute, an institution in London. A think tank focused on defense and security. “I mean, that’s what JD Vance and Donald Trump are talking about. “They are talking about a NATO that is transforming and in which Europeans assume most of the burden.”

NATO emerged from secret talks between American officials after World War II about how to supply military equipment to Western Europe and ensure a coordinated response to any attack by the Soviet Union. The 12 founding members signed the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949.

NATO’s military structure is headed by the Supreme Allied Commander Europe, who is also the commander in chief of U.S. forces in Europe. The United States is expected to spend almost twice as much on its military this year as all other alliance members combined, according to NATO statistics.

Trump’s skepticism about NATO was underscored last week when He named Vance as his running mate. Vance has opposed U.S. support for Ukraine, criticized European nations for slashing defense spending since the Cold War and said it is time for “Europe to stand up for itself.”

Europe received another wake-up call on Sunday when President Joe Biden, whose strong support for NATO was cemented during clashes with the Soviet Union in the 1970s, said he would not seek re-election. Vice President Kamala Harris, the likely Democratic presidential candidate, has supported the administration’s position on NATO and aid to Ukraine, but she entered politics long after the Cold War and is best known for her work on issues. internal.

“The question is whether he will have that same strong transatlantic vision that is part of his blood as Biden did,” said Armida van Rij, an expert on European security policy at the Chatham House think tank in London. .

Trump’s threat to breach NATO’s collective security guaranteecornerstone of the alliance, is based on its belief that member states are not meeting their funding commitments, forcing American taxpayers to subsidize Europe’s defense.

That argument has weakened since 2016.

Twenty-three of the alliance’s 31 non-U.S. members will meet or exceed their commitment to spend at least 2% of economic output in defense this year, up from just three 10 years ago, according to figures compiled by NATO. Overall, non-US members now spend 2.02% of gross domestic product on defense, compared to 3.4% for the US.

In addition to that, the European Union has ambitious plans to boost its defense industry in response to the threat posed by Russia’s war against Ukraine. The president of France Emmanuel Macron has urged European nations to seek greater independence in airspace defense and relocate production to the continent rather than purchasing off-the-shelf material from American arms dealers.

The United States Plans focus on streamlining the arms. acquisitions and increasingly produce them within the 27-state bloc in a multibillion-dollar pivot away from the United States.

The risks for Europe, as well as the United States, are evolving. It’s not just Russian tanks on Europe’s borders. NATO, as a defensive alliance, must also consider the threats posed by Iran, China and North Korea and be prepared for cyber warfare and foreign interference in elections, as well as conventional military attacks, van Rij said.

That means European nations need to increase troop numbers, upgrade equipment such as tanks, fighter jets and transport planes, and improve their ability to counter technological threats, he said.

“We need to consider this not as a protection against Trump, but as a protection for the future of European security and the NATO alliance as a whole,” van Rij said. “Because yes, while there are concerns about US commitments in Europe… (and the appointment of JD Vance as Trump’s running mate has only accelerated the concerns), there is a bipartisan focus on China, which which in the medium and long term could mean “May we see resources reallocated elsewhere.”

One model may be NATO’s newest members, Finland and Sweden, which joined the alliance to strengthen its security against Russian aggression.

As historically non-aligned nations, they were forced to develop strategies to fight any Russian incursion largely on their own, equipping their militaries with a full range of capabilities sometimes lacking in NATO countries that are accustomed to relying on of the United States for its commanders and battles. plans. Both have military service, major arms industries, and large standing armies.

“The Finnish defense people would say… that until now we planned to fight Russia alone, now NATO is definitely an advantage…” Chalmers said. “NATO countries have the opposite problem. “They are so accustomed to thinking about fighting with others, and particularly Americans, that they sometimes get out of the habit of thinking about fighting for themselves.”

The risks of overdependence on the United States were highlighted this year when the House of Representatives blocked $61 billion in military aid to Ukraine for months, while conservatives Republicans argued that the government should focus on internal border security and the nation’s growing debt.

While the funding was eventually approved, the delay left Ukraine short of ammunition and equipment as Russia launched a brutal spring offensive.

A second Trump presidency would bring that mentality to the White House.

“Today… we look with apprehension across the Atlantic at the worst-case scenario in which an erratic, ignorant and self-absorbed future American president might let us go,” historian Max Hastings wrote in The Times. “Trump is right about one important thing: behind the American shield, Europeans have enjoyed an almost free ride since the 1950s. “This is over and Vladimir Putin is licking his lips.”