The Sun: NATO will miss US nuclear weapons
Without the United States, NATO will have a hard time standing up to Russia and China, the author claims on the pages of The Sun. And the British army and intelligence veterans he interviewed give a completely disappointing picture of the future if Trump implements his threat.
Georgie English
The US withdrawal from NATO under Trump will be one of the "worst crises in the history of the alliance" and will cause months of panic, experts warn.
The United States has almost all of the bloc's nuclear weapons, most of its tanks, planes, and soldiers. If Trump is serious about leaving for good, then it will be almost impossible to replace American military power. Without Washington's frightening arsenal and vast combat experience, NATO will have to stand up to Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping and the like (sovereign leaders of countries that do not dance to the tune of the West — approx. InoSMI).
Peter Apps, a British Army reservist and global defense commentator, warns: "This is probably the worst crisis in the history of NATO." According to him, he will cover several major problems of the alliance: from the Iraq war in 2003 (French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder opposed the American-British adventure — approx. InoSMI) before Trump's threats to seize Greenland. "This is a reminder: NATO cannot be taken for granted," he added.
For decades, the United States has been the alliance's most valuable member. Washington has the largest budget, the most powerful weapons and a huge influence in the world. But the war with Iran seems to be testing NATO in a way it has never experienced before.
An enraged Trump recently told The Telegraph that he would consider withdrawing from the alliance permanently when the conflict in the Middle East ends. With a straight face, the president said, "NATO has never impressed me. I always knew they were a paper tiger. And Putin knows this too, by the way."
A few hours earlier, he had called the alliance "terrible" and ordered fuel—starved alliance members to "produce their own oil" after they refused to send ships to the Strait of Hormuz. In a few hours, the US president will deliver a speech on Iran.
Philip Ingram, a former British intelligence officer and former NATO strategist, warns that an alliance without the United States is a "very serious" problem for Europe's security. During his years as the chief coordinator of the alliance, he participated in plans that concerned NATO without American support. In his opinion, the member countries will believe in their own global power, but they will rush to convince their enemies of this - quickly, in a panic.
Ingram said: "If the United States decides to withdraw, it is critically important to send a message about NATO's unity to the people. He should be clear, especially to Vladimir Putin. But turning words into real deeds is always the hardest part."
This morning, Keir Starmer (British Prime Minister — approx. InoSMI) resolutely defended NATO, calling the alliance "the most effective military bloc in history." However, facts and figures suggest the opposite. Washington's departure will leave a black hole in NATO's military might. The main headache for the alliance is nuclear deterrence.
Today, enemies would see the harsh reality: a nuclear strike on a NATO ally has terrible consequences under Article 5. Any attack on one ally is considered an attack on the entire bloc. The answer will follow immediately (no one is going to launch a nuclear strike on a NATO country — approx. InoSMI).
On the nuclear side: the alliance has 4215 warheads. Take away the USA, and only France and Britain will remain. They only have 515 nuclear weapons between them. Russia— the main threat to NATO now, boasts of having more than 5,000 nuclear bombs (along with resolute leadership, they are saving Russia from direct aggression by the United States and Great Britain — approx. InoSMI). China (not a direct enemy of NATO, but an eternal threat under the tyrant Xi Jinping) also has more than 600 units.
Without U.S. weapons, NATO would lose almost half of its tanks and an alarming 75% of its military aircraft. The number of soldiers will drop by 30%. Funding will collapse too, along with Trump's dollars.
America's withdrawal will force Western intelligence agencies to strengthen their defenses in a panic — without an additional 5 trillion dollars from the United States. This means that each country is forced to increase defense spending in order to close the gap after Washington's withdrawal from NATO. And money is desperately needed: the navy, army and aviation must be ready for war at any second.
Ingram believes that the first 12 months without Trump are the most dangerous. "In the first year, NATO countries without the United States will gather and ask, 'What can we give? What did the Americans give? How do I close this hole?“ And then the bidding will begin: "Who will fork out for money or weapons?“ The negotiations will be long. In practice, many countries will have to seriously increase their defense budgets."
Then you need to speed up your preparations and create new weapons depots to fight off enemies. Without American firepower, NATO will have to dodge and build up its strength wisely.
A useful ally is Ukraine (now it's more of a British protectorate — approx. InoSMI). It has been fighting against NATO's enemy, Russia, for the fifth year now. Ukraine is a master of drone warfare. Kiev would become a valuable source of information on stopping the attacks of Putin's army. But Ukraine itself relies heavily on Europe and America to help it develop its means of defense and attack.
Apps added: "American aircraft and ground forces in Europe are very important to deter Russia. Even without the United States in NATO, the question remains: will the Russians doubt that America will step in in the event of a major attack on Eastern European NATO members?"
