Is Trump endangering NATO's future?

BrusselsAfter World War II, the rules were as follows: Europe renounces military force and tries to guarantee peace within and outside the continent only by exercising soft power, with commercial and political interdependencies between member states and foreign powers. Hard power, that of security and defense, is externalized to the United States and is protected under the umbrella of NATO. The main threat to these allies was the expansion of the Soviet Union and, in fact, the founding reason for the Atlantic Alliance was to close ranks against Moscow.

These rules of the game, however, begin to falter with Donald Trump's first term. The New York magnate maintains very good relations with Vladimir Putin and distances himself from the military interests of Europe, which fears the expansionist desires of the Kremlin. He forces them to increase defense spending and warns them that they must once and for all take responsibility for its protection. In this context, the question arises: what is the point of NATO? The clearest answer was given by French President Emmanuel Macron, who summed it up with a sentence: "Brain death."

Joe Biden's victory in 2020 calmed the waters, although not the underlying rumor, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine restored NATO's founding meaning: to protect itself from Russian expansionism. Until Trump landed in the White House for the second time. The Republican leader threatened during his election campaign to leaving European allies in the lurch that they do not spend enough on defense in case of an eventual attack, and has already conceded most of the maximum conditions Putin is imposing a plan to end the war. So the question is exactly the same: what is the point of NATO?

"The project, as we have understood it until now, is dead or on the way to extinction," the defense expert and professor at the UB Rafa Martínez bluntly answers ARA. "It is as if the forward of a soccer team starts scoring own goals. Everyone tries to make him think again and explain to him that he is making a mistake on one side, but it reaches a point that is unsustainable," the researcher exemplifies.

In this sense, the professor points out that the Trump administration "has little interest in Europe" and, in addition, sees how "it must pay a monstrous security bill" for the European allies. And, on the other hand, he highlights that Washington has stopped seeing Russia as the main threat and fears China much more. Along the same lines, the head of the prestigious think tank CEPS researcher Karel Lanoo points out that Trump's priority and that of the United States as a whole seems to be to "isolate" Beijing, even if that means allying with Putin's regime. However, the researcher points out that there are different voices within the Pentagon and that not everyone thinks like Trump, who often "gets carried away by emotion" and "makes contradictory statements."

However, Lanoo is slightly more optimistic about the future of the Atlantic Alliance and, although its existential motive "takes a different direction", he stresses that "it is a very powerful and important military understanding for Europe and its allies." Thus, he recalls that the Atlantic allies still have common military interests and that, at least at the moment, the European Union treaties delegate defence to NATO. In addition, the head of CEPS assures that a greater union of the EU member states in matters of security does not have to be at odds with the Atlantic Alliance. "I do not see that they are opposite paths," insists Lanoo.

The "independence" of Europe

It is common for countries like France and Spain to reject NATO and the military power that the Pentagon has over Europe, but it is more surprising that they are confronting countries like the Baltic republics or Germany, which have built their ideal of freedom and security with Washington and against Moscow. However, Trump is getting leaders of these states to raise their voices against the American power. Without going any further, the future German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, advocated the day after winning the elections for achieve "independence" On military matters in Europe vis-à-vis the United States: "I thought I would never say this, [...] but it is clear that the Americans do not care about the fate of Europe," lamented the conservative leader, who had always shown himself to be a convinced Atlanticist.

The head of European diplomacy, Estonian Kaja Kallas, has also raised her tone against the US president. At the EU Foreign Affairs Council last week, she harshly criticised Trump's rapprochement with Putin and claimed that Washington's current "narrative" contains "messages" from the Kremlin. In this sense, the UB expert notes that the most Atlanticist European allies also "have no choice" but to "accept once and for all that the rules of the international game are changing."

In this context, many experts and most European leaders agree in stressing the importance of increasing defence spending and recovering military autonomy. According to Lanoo, this is "the only way" for Europe to have influence on the geopolitical chessboard, whether within or outside NATO, or in a completely different Western military understanding than the current one. However, at the moment the US still accounts for more than half of the budget of the Atlantic Alliance and, therefore, Trump is looking forward to making and breaking NATO and the war in Ukraine without the European allies being able to stop him.